Leibniz and his PSR

[inquiringmind]

if I understand Leibniz correctly, he believed God never does anything without a reason, always does what’s best, and couldn’t choose between two absolutely equal alternatives (any more than Buridan’s Ass could).

His PSR states that everything has a sufficient reason for being the way that it is, but I think the fact that God apparently decided that most people should be right handed is a strong argument against it.

So strong, in fact, that I wonder how a man as smart as Leibniz could have overlooked it.

If there was an “Adam,” and he started walking, he had to have started on one of two legs.

If it’s true that God wouldn’t chose to do anything if faced with two equally good alternatives (as Leibniz said it was), how could He have created a biped that started walking on one of his equally good two feet?

Leibniz has been called the deepest thinker of the 17th century, how could he have overlooked such an obvious problem?

Am I missing something here, or is the idea as obviously flawed as it seems to me?

[Only_Humean]

Humans aren’t perfectly symmetrical; Leibniz could possibly argue some benefit to right-handedness from that.

[James_S_Saint]

@inquiringmind

if I understand Leibniz correctly, he believed God never does anything without a reason,

He would have been right about that one.

@inquiringmind

… always does what’s best

Subjective.

@inquiringmind

, and couldn’t choose between two absolutely equal alternatives (any more than Buridan’s Ass could).

“God” never creates absolutely identical anything.
…and Buridan’s Ass could (and did).

@inquiringmind

His PSR states that everything has a sufficient reason for being the way that it is, but I think the fact that God apparently decided that most people should be right handed is a strong argument against it.

So strong, in fact, that I wonder how a man as smart as Leibniz could have overlooked it.

If there was an “Adam,” and he started walking, he had to have started on one of two legs.

If it’s true that God wouldn’t chose to do anything if faced with two equally good alternatives (as Leibniz said it was), how could He have created a biped that started walking on one of his equally good two feet?

Leibniz has been called the deepest thinker of the 17th century, how could he have overlooked such an obvious problem?

Am I missing something here, or is the idea as obviously flawed as it seems to me?

Yeah, you’re missing something.
Most often a clouded mind sees only clouds wherein everything is a mystery and merely chance.

You seem to be presuming that both feet and both hands are absolutely equal.
The proposed “God” never presumes.

[inquiringmind]

Humans aren’t perfectly symmetrical; Leibniz could possibly argue some benefit to right-handedness from that.

But wouldn’t that be circular reasoning?

I mean if we’re not perfectly symmetrical, isn’t that only because God didn’t make us that way?

I really don’t understand what you’re saying here, could you possibly clarify it?

You seem to be presuming that both feet and both hands are absolutely equal.

No, I’m presuming they’re not equal.

I’m presuming God made one stronger than the other.

How could He have had a sufficient reason for favoring my right arm and leg with more strength then my left, for putting my appendix on my right instead of my left, and for putting my heart on my left instead of my right?

Obviously, all the organs of the human body couldn’t be on the same side, and there might be some benefit to making the limbs on one side stronger than the other, but isn’t that just another way of saying that God had to make some arbitrary choices to create this world?

And isn’t that just what Leibniz’s PSR doesn’t allow Him to do?

[Only_Humean]

I’m not very good at theological argumentation, I lack an insight into the divine mind

Insofar as your argument can be generalised to an arbitrary choice between universal left/right symmetry, rather than human handedness, I’d agree. Leibniz would probably take it as a sign that such symmetry could not be assumed, I’d guess.