The Best of All Possible Worlds: A Story of Philosophers, God, and Evil

by Steven Nadler

In the spring of 1672, the German philosopher and mathematician Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz arrived in Paris on a furtive diplomatic mission. That project was abandoned quickly, but Leibniz remained in Paris with a singular goal: to get the most out of the city’s intellectual and cultural riches. He benefited, above all, from his friendships with France’s two greatest philosopher-theologians of the period, Antoine Arnauld and Nicolas de Malebranche. The interactions of these three men would prove of great consequence not only for Leibniz’s own philosophy but for the development of modern philosophical and religious thought.  Despite their wildly different views and personalities, the three philosophers shared a single, passionate concern: resolving the problem of evil. Why is it that, in a world created by an allpowerful, all-wise, and infinitely just God, there is sin and suffering? Why do bad things happen to good people, and good things to bad people?  This is the story of a clash between radically divergent worldviews. But it is also a very personal story. At its heart are the dramatic—and often turbulent—relationships between three brilliant and resolute individuals. In this lively and engaging book, Steven Nadler brings to life a debate that obsessed its participants, captivated European intellectuals, and continues to inform our ways of thinking about God, morality, and the world.

Genres: Philosophy, History, Nonfiction, Religion, Biography, Theology

320 pages, Hardcover

First published October 28, 2008

About the author

Steven Nadler is the William H. Hay II Professor of Philosophy at the University of Wisconsin--Madison. His books include Rembrandt's Jews, which was a finalist for the Pulitzer Prize; Spinoza: A Life, which won the Koret Jewish Book Award; and A Book Forged in Hell: Spinoza's Scandalous Treatise and the Birth of the Secular Age (Princeton).

Reviews

[Buğra Davutluoğlu · Rating 4 out of 5]

Cemiyetin üç zeki ve farklı mizaçtaki genci, dönemin en hararetli konusu üzerine sıkı bir tartışmaya girerler. Zamanla kendiliğinden bir seyirci topluluğu oluşur. Artık her birinin taraftarı, destekçisi vardır ve heyecanla kimin haklı çıkacağını izlerler.

İddialar, itirazlar, çürütmeler...

Derken Spinoza olaya müdahil olur. Önce derin bir sessizlik, arkasından centilmenlik sınırlarının çok ötesinde sataşmalar, ithamlar...

Ama bu sonucu değiştirmez; mekanın ve konunun gerçek sahibi Spinoza'dır. :)

[Noah Goats · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is a reminder that many of the things we care about today, issues that are flash points that lead to fierce debates and destroyed friendships, will likely seem meaningless to future generations. The intellectual struggle to explain why god acts the way he does, and why he created the earth the way he did – this epic debate between Leibniz, Malebranche, and Arnauld – can elicit nothing more from the reader than a shrug today. Nadler does a good job of telling the story and explaining the issues... but really, who cares anymore?

[Kristopher · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating, brilliantly researched, fun read on what might be one of the most interesting time periods in philosophy. Nadler does a masterful job of making accessible the complex philosophical approaches of three lesser-known, but important figures of the 17th century, placing the debate firmly in a broader socio-historical context. While having a background in (at least Descartes, maybe the early-modern period more broadly) made this a quick read, I could see that not having familiarity with the issues might make this slightly less accessible, but the extensive and insightful end-notes, I think aid in both understanding and in providing options for further research/reading once the book is complete. Furthermore, Nadler does a nice job in showing how the issues about which these theological-philosophers wrestled are still pertinent to philosophers, theologians, and everyone else to this day, effectively pointing out that this endeavor is not merely a pedantic anachronism. Absolutely wonderful.

[Noella · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ik ben gestopt in dit boek. Het werd me te ingewikkeld, die filosofische theorieën. Het eerste deel vond ik wel heel interessant, de levensgeschiedenis van Liebniz, hoe hij in Parijs terecht kwam en daar Malebranche en zijn werk leerde kennen. Dan volgde een beschrijving van het leven en de denkwijze van Malebranche, die ik ook wel interessant vond. Daarna ging het boek hoofdzakelijk over de gedachtengang van deze personen, hun (schriftelijke) discussies enz. Hier kon ik me niet meer in vinden, en na een tijdje het boek te hebben laten liggen, dan nog eens een poging gedaan om er in verder te lezen, heb ik nu besloten om te stoppen, ik kan beter mijn leestijd steken in iets dat mij wel interesseert.

[Joe · Rating 4 out of 5]

A clear, concise and accessible overview of one of the more interesting discussions in early modern philosophy and theology - the nature of God (voluntarist, rational, or other), and the possibility of divine justice. A background in the period wouldn't hurt (particularly Descartes and an understanding of the Reformation and its aftereffects), but isn't necessary to appreciate Nadler's work. The footnotes are generally excellent and provide a good opportunity for cross-referencing or further reading (if desired). A deeper discussion of theodicy might have been appreciated, and it seemed as though the Spinozan 'threat' to the work of Leibniz, Malebranche and Arnauld could have been pursued further. However, aside from this, a very enjoyable read, and highly recommended.

[Rick · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you like 17th century European politics, philosophy, and theology...and who doesn't?...then you will like this book. Arguments about the meaning of existence dominated the writings of Leibniz, Spinoza, Malebranche, and Arnauld, rationalists who tried to explain the will and power of God. For example, Spinoza's God was one with Nature and willed the world into existence out of necessity, in a kind of deterministic causality. Leibniz's God exercised free will in the creation of the "best of all possible worlds," chosen from an infinite number of others. Enter Malebranche and Arnauld and a host of other players and you have a dynamic interplay of ideas. What's not to like?

[Batumar · Rating 4 out of 5]

Temi come "la grazia di Dio" o "la libertá di Dio nel momento della creazione del mondo" sembrerebbero lontani dai nostri interessi, lontani dai problemi della contemporaneitá. Ci riguardano ancora invece. Ci riguarderanno sempre. Sia che siamo credenti, sia che non lo siamo. Quando si spengono le luci, la sera, e chiudiamo le palpebre, siamo soli col nostro dio, comunque lo pensiamo e possiamo capire perché grandi menti come queste abbiano speso le loro esistenze arrovellandosi tanto su queste questioni. Nadler é sempre un'ottimo narratore, oltre che uno storico della filosofia esperto proprio di questi autori. Vale la pena dunque, per gli appassionati del genere, di sforzarsi un pochino per seguire le dispute tra Leibniz, Malebranche e Arnaud, con Spinoza sullo sfondo parteggiando per chi troviamo piú convincente. Io non ho dubbio alcuno: ho scelto da tempo...

[Leigh · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you like reading about the history of philosophy, this is a great book. It presents the history of ideas, and the strange ways that thoughts come about. If you're not interested in the subject material, this book will not make you interested in it however. If you are new to philosophy, then this book will definitely drag in places where the author goes into depth about what these philosophers were arguing. As a grad student in the philosophy of religion, this was fascinating and enjoyable. It was outside of the focus of my field, in that I rarely work with the history and pattern of how ideas come about, which made it a "for fun" read for me.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

I took away a star because it isn't an easy read. In fact, I got so bogged down that I went to the index and found what I wanted to focus on (evil) and read the pages relevant to it. However, I don't want to diminish the effort that the author, a philosophy professor, has put into this book; it may have started as a dissertation, considering the extensive research as revealed in the notes and bibliography. The milieu--late-17th to early-18th-century Europe--being written about was a cauldron of religious and philosophical ideas unleashed by the Reformation and the Enlightenment, so bravo to the author for keeping the page numbering right at 300, including notes, bibliography, acknowledgments and index. A philosophy student, though, would appreciate this more than I did.

[Brian Watson · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you want an introduction to some of the most important thinkers of the late seventeenth century, this book is for you. Now, that might not seem like an interesting book, but Nadler, an expert in this area, makes the subject come a live. He tells the story of Leibniz, Arnauld, and Malebranche in such a way that the differing views on God and evil held by these philosophers creates a fascinating drama. (He also includes a chapter on Spinoza, whose shadow rested on other philosophers of that era.) I read the book for information on Leibniz, but I'm glad I encountered these other thinkers along the way.

[Don · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book centers on Leibniz and his correspondence with other continental philosophers over the "problem of evil" within philosophy of religion. Ultimately, I was hoping for more philosophy and less history, and felt the book spent too much time providing biographical sketch information on Leibniz and others.

[Hristo Ivanov · Rating 5 out of 5]

Although marketed(in Bulgaria at least) as a nice easy-readable biography, it turned out to be a semi-academic reading of some major philosophers, which I enjoyed even more. Very well crafted with the interchanging of biography parts and the explanation of the theories, which should be understandable for non-graduates if they have an interest in the subject matter.

[James · Rating 5 out of 5]

A history of seventeenth-century European philosophy (specifically focusing on Leibniz, Malebranche and Arnauld) that reads more like a novel. For those with interests in this field, or interest in philosophical topics about the ultimate nature of reality or morality, this is a fun and captivating read. Highly recommend!

[.]

Темата на книгата за "Злото" е топ. Ще и хвърлям от време на време по някое око. За съжаление няма аудиокнига на английски иначе щах да я изслушам накуп, но с четенето е по-сложно - трябва време, отдаденост, и пр.

В момента гледам един курс на Великите курсове на тема "Защо злото съществува?", който също е много добър.

[Andrew · Rating 4 out of 5]

A superb piece of history of philosophy, focused on the reactions, responses and relationships among Leibniz, Malebranche and Arnauld, in the context of the rapid rise of Cartesianism over the medieval thought-world. And, because it’s Nadler, also a fine chapter on “the specter of Spinoza” haunting them all.

[Nathan St Pierre · Rating 2 out of 5]

A decent read, but a slow start and highly repetitive. Although, sometimes the repetition is helpful since various philosophies discussed are not necessarily common knowledge

[Brian Weaver · Rating 3 out of 5]

Why is there evil in the world? Why does God permit it to exist?

[Mark · Rating 4 out of 5]

4 stars, if you like this kind of thing, 3 if you don't.

[Kris Demey · Rating 3 out of 5]

Steven Nadler writes so well that he’s managed to produce a pageturner about Leibniz, a man who usually features in the lists of most boringest (yes, I know, [sic]) philosophers.

Keep on writing, mr. Nadler, and I’ll read.


After reading: tough read, dry and sometimes technical. But still highly recommended.

[Tjibbe Wubbels · Rating 4 out of 5]

Why does evil exist? Why is there sin and pain in this world? Nadler explorers this issue by describing the views of three philosophers: Gottfried Leibniz, Nicolas Malebranche and Antoine Arnauld.

In the seventeenth century a lot of common laws of physics were discovered. As a result some changes in philosophic theories were needed: If the physical world has common laws, perhaps God created these. But do these common laws dictate the subsequent possible actions God can take?

There is no doubt that God created the best possible world. But why does it include evil? According to Leibniz the existence of simple laws are a prerequisite of a rational God that (in part) dictate the best possible world that God can create. Malebranche stays close saying a rational God wants the best possible world as long as it follows simple laws of nature: God lives by the simple laws he created himself. Arnauld says God is not rational, and puny humans can never know why He does things the way He does. God doesn't create something because it is good, but something is good because God created it, no further discussion. Malebranche and Leibniz argue that if this is the case, there is no longer a need to praise God or talk about a theodicee.

So they may not agree on the logic behind it all, but it looks like God had to compromise: to create the best possible world including simple laws of nature there was no choice but to include evil. According to Arnauld and Leibniz, creation includes evil to make the result more alluring much in the same way as music has dissonants. According to Malebranche these dissonants exist because of the simple laws that God wants to follow.

A best possible world isn't necessarily the best world for every individual: Only bad things can happen to good people or only good things to bad people. This doesn't seem very fair. Luckily, Leibniz has a solution: This will be compensated in the afterlife with eternal reward or punishment. Nice and clean and impossible to disprove!

As a full-blown atheist it is sometimes frustrating to read the very solid arguments these very wise men made about why an infinitely good being would allow evil into this world without ever questioning the fundamental issues: The presence of evil without a solid reason is prove for either 1) God not being good 2) God not being perfect or 3) God not existing at all. 1 and 2 could not be possible because it said differently in the bible and 3 was never even considered. Spinoza dared to say it: God is nature, there is no higher purpose. Using the will of God to solve an argument means to seek refuge in ignorance. However, Leibniz, Malebranche and Arnauld didn't dare to go there, they actually went at great lengths to avoid it.

It's fascinating to read the often fierce debate about God, good and evil while in the end it's simple a matter of faith. Malebranche says "I believe God acts rationally", while Arnauld says "This is not the case. God is not a human, His will and reason are one". Yeah, well, that's just like your opinion, man. We might not agree now, but this was the state of philosophy, science, politics and their interrelatedness at the end of the seventeenth century and Nadler provides us with a solid insight into this periods thinking.

[Kerry · Rating 3 out of 5]

A good book but I'd be reluctant to recommend it to anybody unless they were distinctly interested in the topic. Sort of like meditation--it's great if you don't fall asleep. The book is esoteric and a bit obscure and the title of the book is an apt description for the subject. Liebniz's philosophy of God, good and evil left me with a greater appreciation for Voltaire. And at the end of the book I felt of Leibniz and his philosophy of the best of all worlds that it was like reading about Mozart had he been born before the invention of the piano or harpsichord.

[Ed · Rating 4 out of 5]

Taking the presence of Malebranche, Arnauld and Leibniz in Paris in the 1670s to connect these three in a narrative, Nadler procedes to compare and contrast their ideas, especially about the presence of evil in the world. I found his writing engaging. By considering these three he helped make their ideas clearer. At the end he adds Spinoza to the mix and that suggests what all the fuss was about. While belief in Providence is alive in the world today, this book helps me understand how far those of us who don't share this belief have moved and how different our world is from theirs.

[Orin · Rating 4 out of 5]

Nadler does a masterful job of bring alive the disputes that mattered to philosophers/theologians in the 17th and 18th century. Even if the subject of the debate is our imaginary friend, God, and we should finally be getting over him, the historical context becomes alive.

[John · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very enjoyable and extremely readable account of the some of the philosophies of the late 1600's. Focuses on Melebranche, Arnaude and Leibnitz with side trips to Descartes and Spinoza. Examines their ideas relative to God and why there is evil in the world as the central theme.

[Robert · Rating 3 out of 5]

Leibniz, Malebranche & Arnauld converge in Paris in the late 1600's & begin a dialogue on good and evil and Nadler tells the story. Historically, interesting. Philosophically, well, it's a nice story.

[!Tæmbuŝu]

KOBOBOOKS

[Markku · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent and very readable account on problem of evil. For me especially interesting was the Malebranche-Arnauld-axis and the short section on Malebranche, Arnauld and Spinoza.

[Gary Hall · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good thought-provoking read, although a bit redundant in spots. Not bad, not bad...

[Jinbo · Rating 4 out of 5]

Great book! wish I read it before my Spinoza exam, hmm, three years ago...