Necessary Being

NECESSARY BEING: THE COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT

Principle of Sufficient Reason: For every truth, for everything that is so, there is a sufficient reason for it’s being true of being so. This is from G. W. Leibeniz’s metaphysical statement in that “the great principle…which holds that nothing takes place without sufficient reason, that is to say that nothing happens without its being possible for one who has enough knowledge of things to give a sufficient reason to determine why it is and not otherwise.”[1] The Principle of Sufficient Reason does not tell us that everything that happens has a meaning or explain the existence of contingent beings other than be an appeal to the existence of a necessary being that is in some manner responsible for their existence. (148) Van Inwagen, takes the route of trying to find a justification for the existence of contingent beings without a necessary being. This does not for go the universals, such as numbers, because they in and of themselves cannot explain the individuals.

Contingent Beings

In the assumption that there is nothing but contingent beings, (which we know is not possible because if there is a necessary being which exists in one possible world then he necessarily exists in all possible worlds including the actual world) is there a reasonable answer to the question, “Why are there contingent beings?”
In this world (I am not saying possible because I do not believe it to be possible or the actual) beings exist on how they relate to each other, in other words on their contingency. This then presupposes the existence of contingent beings, it does not give the explanation nor the rationale for their existence because there is no appeal to something other than the contingent beings (van Inwagen states, "...to explain the existence of the members of any class of contingent beings, one must cite facts about the properties and relations of beings outside that calls." (p 148). Then it must be reasonable that we appeal to something other than contingent beings, whether God or the theory of evolution etc., for existence.
In a possible world such that there are beings, the beings are either necessary or contingent. A being can be necessary or a being can be contingent then making that there must be at least one necessary being (otherwise we would dive into an infinite regression of contingency). Simply stated then the cosmological argument states that if there can be something, there has to be something, if it is not impossible for there to be something, it is impossible for their to be nothing (149). But this statement neglects the Principle of Sufficient Reason. So we are now to find if the statement is upheld with the Principle of Sufficient Reason.

Principle of Sufficient Reason

We start off with some scientifical difficulties, natural events happen without explanation if their incidence. Another problem that occurs is that according to the Principle of Sufficient Reason is, "...that all true propositions are necessarily true." (150) If there is a given reason for a contingent being, there must exist another contingent being that has no connection to the first contingent being. Therefore, the whole of contingents can have no reasoning and then there

[1] Leibeniz: Philosophical Writings trans. and ed. by Mary Morris (London: J.M. Dent & Sons, 1934) pp. 25-26.