Philosophy

Leibniz argument that our world is the best of all the possible worlds that God can create is his attempt to defend Gods omni characteristics. In addition, it is also his attempt to explain the evil and sin that is present in our current world. This is a response to critics question that questions God omni characteristics due to the presence of evil and sin in the world.

Leibniz argued that our world despite its imperfection and the presence of sin is the best of all the possible world God can create for us. For Leibniz the best of all possible world that can be created does not necessarily and will never mean a world that is perfect and is negated of suffering. He used a neo-Platonist argument saying that all creatures (i.e. created by a Creator or Superior Being) is a limitedcorrupted version of its creator. The thing or element that can limit or corrupt Gods creation is evil or sin. In this case, evil or sin is a necessary element for all the creatures. Leibniz also added that the universe is so vast that we only managed to have a glimpse of its parts. It is presumptuous to judge our world with this very limited information.

In case that Leibniz was wrong in this declaration and we can find a way to say that this is not the best of all the possible world it will imply the failure of rationalist to answer questions about God or the problem of evil. Leibniz argument is a flawless argument that use the rules of logic. In case it will fail and we can cite evidences that is untrue, rationalism, per se will lose its validity to answer such questions.

His statement is an argument made possible by the rules of logic. It is valid and rational in the theoretical framework. However, if we are going to judge and validate it empirically, we will definitely fail due to its nature. It is impossible to cite empirical proofs with his framework. We cannot go out there outside our world and see if there are other possible world that is better.