综合英语.西方思想经典选读(常俊跃黄滔)_Text B God and Evil: A Positive View（1 / 1）_综合英语.西方思想经典选读最新章节免费阅读无弹窗

G. W. Leibniz

Pre-reading

Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz (1646-1716) was one of the greatest thinkers of the 17th and 18th centuries and is known as the last “universal genius”. To this day he occupies a prominent place in the history of mathematics and the history. What he has composed on the world, God, nature, and the soul is of the most sublime eloquence. In philosophy, Leibniz is most noted for his optimism, i.e. his conclusion that our Universe is, in a restricted sense, the best possible one that God could have created, an idea that was often lampooned by others such as Voltaire. Leibniz, along with René Descartes and Baruch Spinoza, was one of the three great 17th century advocates of rationalism.

Leibniz made an important contribution to the history of the ontological argument. In short, Leibniz’s argument is: 1) God is a being having all perfections. 2) A perfection is a simple and absolute property. 3) Existence is a perfection. 4) If existence is part of the essence of a thing, then it is a necessary being. 5) If it is possible for a necessary being to exist, then a necessary being does exist. 6) It is possible for a being to have all perfections. 7) Therefore, a necessary being (God) does exist.

For the Cosmological Argument, Leibniz says that even in the case of contingent truths or truths of fact there must be a sufficient reason why they are so and not otherwise. But, since each particular truth of fact is contingent upon some other(prior) truth of fact, the reason for the entire series of truths must be located outside the series, and this ultimate reason is what we call God. Leibniz fills out this argument with a fascinating account of the nature of God. So he is able to demonstrate the uniqueness of God, his omniscience, omnipotence, and benevolence from the twin assumptions of the contingency of the world and the Principle of Sufficient Reason.

Prompts for Your Reading

1.What does the author want to tell the reader about God at the beginning?

2.How does Leibniz define evil?

3.Does the existence of evil in the world hamper the existence of God?

4.What does Leibniz say about the afflictions of men, especially of good men?

5.What is Leibniz’s opinion about the losses and setbacks in the world?

[1] It follows from the supreme perfection of God that in producing the universe He chose the best possible plan, containing the greatest variety together with the greatest order; the best arranged situation, place, and time; the greatest effect produced by the simplest means; the most power, the most knowledge, the most happiness and goodness in created things of which the universe admitted. For as all possible things have a claim to existence in the understanding of God in proportion to their perfections, the result of all these claims must be the most perfect actual world which is possible. Otherwise it would not be possible to explain why things have happened as they have rather than otherwise ...

[2] ... The ultimate reason of the reality both of essences and of existences in a unity must certainly be greater, higher, and prior to the world itself, since through it alone not only the existent things, which the world contains, but also the things that are possible have their reality. It cannot be found except in one single source, because of the interconnection of all these things with one another. It is evident that from this source existent things are continually issuing and being produced, and have been produced, since it is not clear why one state of the world rather than another, yesterday’s state rather than today’s, should flow from the world itself. It is also evident how God acts not only physically but also freely; and how there lies in Him not only the efficient but also the final cause; and how from Him proceeds the reason not only of the greatness or potency that there is in the mechanism for the universe as now established, but also of the goodness or wisdom involved in the establishing of it.1

[3] In case someone may think that moral perfection or goodness is here being confused with metaphysical2 perfection or greatness, and may admit the latter while denying the former, it should be pointed out that it follows from what has been said not only that the world is the most perfect physically, or, if you prefer it, metaphysically, or in other words that that series of things will be forthcoming which in actual fact affords the greatest quantity of reality, but also that the world should be the most perfect morally, because true moral perfection is physical perfection in minds themselves. Hence the world is not only the most wonderful machine, but also in regard to minds it is the best commonwealth, by whose means there is bestowed on minds the greatest possible amount of felicity or joyfulness; and it is in this that their physical perfection consists.

[4] But, you will say, we find in the world the very opposite of this. Often the worst of sufferings fall upon the best men; the innocent (I speak not only of the brutes, but of men also) are afflicted3, and are slain even with tortures; indeed the world, especially if we look at the government of the human race, seems rather a confused chaos than an affair ordained by some supreme wisdom. So it appears at first sight, I allow: but on deeper examination it must be agreed that the opposite is the case. It is evident a priori4 from those very principles which I have adduced5 that without doubt there is secured in the world the highest perfection that there could possibly be of all things, and therefore of minds.

[5] And indeed it is unreasonable, as the lawyers say, to give a judgment without inspecting the whole law. We have knowledge of a tiny part of that eternity which stretches out immeasurably. For how small a thing is the memory of the few thousand years which history hands down to us! And yet out of so little experience we rashly make judgments about the immeasurable and the eternal; just as men who had been born and bred in prison or in the subterranean salt-mines of Sarmatia might think that there was no other light in the world than the treacherous flicker of torches, which was hardly sufficient to guide their footsteps. Look at the most lovely picture, and then cover it up, leaving uncovered only a tiny scrap of it. What else will you see there, even if you look as closely as possible, and the more so as you look from nearer and nearer at hand, but a kind of confused medley of colors, without selection, without art! And yet when you remove the covering, and look upon the whole picture from the proper place, you will see that what previously seemed to you to have been aimlessly smeared on the canvas was in fact accomplished with the highest art by the author of the work. What happens to the eyes in painting is equally experienced by the ears in music. The great composers frequently mingle discords with harmonious chords so that the listener may be stimulated and pricked as it were, and may become eager to know what is going to happen; presently when all is restored to order he feels so much the more content. In the same way we may take pleasure in small dangers, or in the experience of ills, from the very sense or proof they give us of our own power or felicity. Or again at the spectacle of rope-walking or sword-dancing we are delighted by the very clement of fear that is involved, and we ourselves in play with children hold them as if we were going to throw them out of the window, and half let them go — in very much the same way as the ape carried Christian, King of Denmark, when he was still an infant wrapped in long clothes, to the edge of the roof, and then, when everybody was in terror, turned it into jest and put him back into his cradle safe and sound. On the same principle it has an insipid6 effect if we always eat sweet things; sharp, acid, and even bitter things should be mixed in to stimulate the taste. He who has not tasted what is bitter has not earned what is sweet, nor will he appreciate it. This is the very law of enjoyment, that positive pleasure does not come from an even course; such things produce weariness, and make men dull, not joyful.

[6] What I have said, however, about the possibility of a part being disturbed without upsetting the harmony of the whole must not be interpreted to mean that no account is taken of the parts; or that it is sufficient for the whole world to be completed at all points, even though it should turn out that the human race was wretched, and that there was in the universe no care for justice and no account was taken of us — as is maintained by some people whose judgment about the sum of things is ill-grounded．For the truth is that, just as in a well-regulated commonwealth care is taken that as far as possible things shall be to the interest of the individual, in the same way the universe would not be sufficiently perfect unless, as far as can be done without upsetting the universal harmony, the good of individual people is considered. Of this there could be established no better measure than the very law of justice itself, which dictates that each should have a part in the perfection of the universe and in his own happiness in proportion to his own virtue and to the extent to which his will is directed towards the common good, by which is fulfilled what we call the charity and love of God, in which alone, according to the judgment of wise theologians also, stands the whole force and power of the Christian religion. Nor ought it to seem remarkable that all this deference7 should be paid to minds in the universe, since they bear the closest resemblance to the image of the supreme Author, and their relation to Him is not that of machines to their artificer (like the rest of the world) but rather that of citizens to their prince; moreover they will endure as long as the universe itself, and they, in some manner, express and concentrate the whole in themselves; so that it might be said that minds are whole parts.

[7] As for the afflictions of men, and especially of good men, we must hold ourselves

assured that they contribute to the greater good of those who suffer them; and this is true not only theologically, but physically also, just as a grain of wheat cast into the earth must suffer before it bears fruit. And in general it is true to say that afflictions are for the time being evil, but in effect good, since they are short cuts to a greater perfection. Similarly in physics the liquids which ferment slowly are also more slowly purified, whereas those in which there is a more violent disturbance throw off the foreign parts with greater force and so more quickly become pure. You might fairly say that this is a case of taking a step back in order to make a stronger leap forward. These things must be allowed to be not only pleasant and consoling, but also most true. Indeed in general I hold that there is nothing truer than happiness, and nothing happier and sweeter than truth.

[8] Further, we realize that there is a perpetual and a most free progress of the whole

universe in fulfillment of the universal beauty and perfection of the works of God, so that it is always advancing towards a greater development. Thus, even now a great part of our earth has received cultivation, and will receive it more and more. And though it is true that there are times when some parts of it go back again to virgin forest, or are destroyed again and oppressed, this must be understood in the same sense as I just now interpreted the meaning of affliction, namely, that this very destruction and oppression contributes to achieve something greater, so that in some way we receive profit from our very loss.

[9] To the objection that may perhaps be offered that if this were so the world would long ago have become a paradise, the answer is at hand: although many substances have already come to great perfection, yet owing to the infinite divisibility of what is continuous, there always remain in the abyss of things parts that are asleep, and these need to be awakened and to be driven forward into something greater and better — in a word, to a better development. Hence this progress does not ever come to an end.

Notes

1.It is also evident how God acts not only physically but also freely; and how there lies in Him not only the efficient but also the final cause; and how from Him proceeds the reason not only of the greatness or potency that there is in the mechanism for the universe as now established, but also of the goodness or wisdom involved in the establishing of it.同样明显的是，上帝不仅按照自然法则行动，而且还自由地行动，从上帝那儿不仅可以找到直接原因，而且还可以找到最终原因；上帝不仅是现存的宇宙机制巨大力量的源泉，而且还是建立这一机制的行动所涉及的仁慈和智慧的源泉。

2.metaphysical: 形而上学的

3.afflict: cause pain or suffering in

4.a priori:(Latin) involving deductive reasoning from a general principle to a necessary effect

5.adduce: advance evidence for引证

6.insipid: lacking interest or significance

7.deference: a disposition or tendency to yield to the will of others

Questions for Further Thinking

1.In defending the supreme perfection of God, the author says, “Otherwise it would not be possible to explain why things have happened as they have rather than otherwise ...” Do you agree with him? Why or why not?

2.“The ultimate reason of the reality both of essences and of existences in a unity must certainly be greater, higher, and prior to the world itself, since through it alone not only the existent things, which the world contains, but also the things that are possible have their reality.” What could “essences” and “the things that are possible” mean here?

3.How does the author distinguish moral perfection from metaphysical perfection?

4.Analogy, as we have learned, draws a parallel between two unlike things that have several common qualities or points of resemblance. It can be used for the purpose of persuasion or for the explanation or exposition of an idea. In helping the reader to get rid of their confusion about the notion of “perfection”, the author uses several analogies. Find all of them to see if they are effective.

5.“As for the afflictions of men, and especially of good men, we must hold ourselves assured that they contribute to the greater good of those who suffer them.” What is this greater good the afflictions do to those who suffer them?

6.Do you find some of the author’s accounts confusing, contradictory or even sophistic? Make your doubts and further explore the ideas involved through more in-depth research.

After-reading Assignment

Oral Work

1.Work orally with your group members. If you do not accept the author’s description of the“perfect” world, relate to contrary states of the world and find other sources than those of God.

2.People may doubt God’s perfect job and are troubled by the phenomenon: “Often the worst of sufferings fall upon the best men; the innocent are afflicted, and are slain even with tortures.” But the author takes great efforts to elaborate that the opposite is true. Comment on his thought critically, with convincing theories and evidence. Add more familiar evidence from our own history and culture and make a speech supporting the author.

3.“He who has not tasted what is bitter has not earned what is sweet, nor will he appreciate it. This is the very law of enjoyment, that positive pleasure does not come from an even course; such things produce weariness, and make men dull, not joyful.”To what extent do you agree or disagree with this idea? Share your view with your partner.

Written Work

1.“We may take pleasure in small dangers, or in the experience of ills, from the very sense or proof they give us of our own power or felicity.” Compose a short essay of about 400 words in support of this statement with strong evidence.

2.Explore the principles of Buddhism and write an outline of the causes of people’s sufferings from Buddhism. Compare them with what Leibniz says about the same concern. List all the similarities and differences you can identify.

3.Leibniz uses analogy to explain some abstract or difficult concepts. You can learn to use analogy by following more examples: 1) Failure is like a brutal injury; it’s very debilitating, especially at first, but once you get over it, you are ready to take on the world again. 2) Being put in the friend zone is like being stranded on a deserted island paradise. You are surrounded by something beautiful, but staying there will eventually kill you. 3) Love is like a rose, so sweet, that one always tries to gather it in spite of its thorns. Now compose some sentences or short paragraphs using analogy to explain difficult or abstract concepts or sensations of your own choice.

4.It seems that Leibniz is very optimistic from a Christian point of view about this world, while Buddhists speak more about evils and sufferings. Write a short essay from a secular point of view illustrating how we should look at human evils or sufferings.