Skip to main content

Leibnizian CA: Davis-Craig

One critique of the Leibniz cosmological argument comes from philosopher Stuart Davis. He stated that the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) demands a reason for the existence of the necessary being, which leads to an infinite regress. He offers a modified version of the argument that avoids this problem.

This argument is also defended by William Lane Craig, hence the name "Davis-Craig".

Formulation​

  1. Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence.
  2. The universe exists.
  3. Therefore, the universe has an explanation of its existence. (1, 2)
  4. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.
  5. Therefore, the explanation of the existence of the universe is God. (3, 4)

Self Explanation​

Just like the Leibniz CA, one should be skeptical of the concept of self-explanation, as a generalized form of the PSR. Essentially, an object cannot be its own reason for existence, and if circular explanations are excluded, then the PSR demands an infinite regress.

Many philosophers, including theists, would not accept the first premise of the argument.

The Universe as a Whole​

The universe does not have to be a concrete object in and of itself. While various spatio-temporal objects exist, the universe, as the "sum" of all these objects, may not exist in the same way. One modification could be to adjust the first premise to include collections of objects.

Is God the Best Explanation?​

The fourth premise states that if the universe has an explanation, that explanation is God. This totally does not follow from the previous premises that somehow the explanation must be God; this is a non-sequitur.

As mentioned previously, there are many other possible "explanations" or "first causes" that could be posited, that do not necessarily entail the traditional conception of God.