In Leibniz’s writings, Discourse on Metaphysics , he upheld the view that final causes are everywhere and to not notice them, but believe in God is ridiculous. Since as we know, Leibniz believed that God created the best possible world for us. Now getting to my point, I would like to effectively defend Leibniz against Descartes because in his writings, Meditations on First Philosophy , Descartes rejects final causes. First, I will explain what the connection between final causes and efficient causes is and how Leibniz believed it was ignorant of people to study one and judge the other and vice versa. Then I will explain how Descartes rejection of final causation is what created weakness in his argument in meditation 4 . Finally, I will discuss how Leibniz believed that final causes are everywhere and that his beliefs, while unconventional, are unerring because God put a blueprint in us with a path that we uncover as we grow old.
The definition that Aristotle used when describing efficient cause, and the one that most philosophers use, is a source of an object that brings it into being or initiates motion to start or stop. Efficient cause is used to explain mostly everything that happens in the world. Leibniz states in section 22 that it is not wrong to use this method of explanation as, “it goes deeper and in some sense more immediate and a priori, is, on the other hand, quite difficult when one comes to details…” (Leibniz, Discourse on Metaphysics). He …show more content…
While Descartes had a harder time explaining his theories because he did not want to believe in final causation. The idea that God gave us individual blueprints gave space and made it easier for Leibniz to explain why events take place in our lives. It also aligned perfectly with the theory of final causation. By having a blueprint, we all have a
The definition that Aristotle used when describing efficient cause, and the one that most philosophers use, is a source of an object that brings it into being or initiates motion to start or stop. Efficient cause is used to explain mostly everything that happens in the world. Leibniz states in section 22 that it is not wrong to use this method of explanation as, “it goes deeper and in some sense more immediate and a priori, is, on the other hand, quite difficult when one comes to details…” (Leibniz, Discourse on Metaphysics). He …show more content…
While Descartes had a harder time explaining his theories because he did not want to believe in final causation. The idea that God gave us individual blueprints gave space and made it easier for Leibniz to explain why events take place in our lives. It also aligned perfectly with the theory of final causation. By having a blueprint, we all have a