Rationalism and Necessitarianism

Noûs 46 (3):418-448 (2012)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Metaphysical rationalism, the doctrine which affirms the Principle of Sufficient Reason (the PSR), is out of favor today. The best argument against it is that it appears to lead to necessitarianism, the claim that all truths are necessarily true. Whatever the intuitive appeal of the PSR, the intuitive appeal of the claim that things could have been otherwise is greater. This problem did not go unnoticed by the great metaphysical rationalists Spinoza and Leibniz. Spinoza’s response was to embrace necessitarianism. Leibniz’s response was to argue that, despite appearances, rationalism does not lead to necessitarianism. This paper examines the debate between these two rationalists and concludes that Leibniz has persuasive grounds for his opinion. This has significant implications both for the plausibility of the PSR and for our understanding of modality.
Reprint years
2012
PhilPapers/Archive ID
LINRAN
Upload history
Archival date: 2014-02-20
View other versions
Added to PP index
2011-10-20

Total views
2,921 ( #810 of 58,406 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
258 ( #1,688 of 58,406 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.