Written and collected by Zia H Shah MD, Chief Editor of the Muslim Times

Where did everything come from? Our universe, laws of nature, mathematical, abstract objects, our consciousness, apparent design in our universe?

There are ways to try to answer these questions, and then there are ways to evade the questions:

Philosophers who argue that everything exists necessarily (i.e., all entities exist in all possible worlds, with no genuine contingency) are proponents of necessitarianism. This view contrasts with the more common belief that some things exist contingently (i.e., they might not have existed). Below are key figures and their arguments:

---

1. Baruch Spinoza (1632–1677)

• Key Idea: Spinoza’s metaphysics posits that there is only one substance—God or Nature (Deus sive Natura)—which exists necessarily. All things (modes) are modifications of this single substance.
  • Necessitarianism: Since God’s existence and essence are identical, and all things follow necessarily from God’s nature, there is no contingency. Everything that exists must exist.
  • Famous Quote: “In nature there is nothing contingent, but all things are determined from the necessity of the divine nature to exist and act in a certain way” (Ethics, Part I, Proposition 29).
  • Objection: Spinoza’s denial of contingency conflicts with everyday experience (e.g., we perceive choices and accidents as contingent). His reply: Contingency is an illusion stemming from human ignorance of causes.

---

2. G.W. Leibniz (1646–1716)

• Key Idea: Leibniz defended a qualified necessitarianism. While he accepted contingency in a limited sense, his Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) and best possible world thesis imply that God’s choice to create this world was metaphysically necessary.
  • Necessity of the Best: God, being perfectly rational, must create the best possible world. Thus, this world exists necessarily.
  • Contingency: Leibniz distinguished between “moral necessity” (God’s choice) and “absolute necessity” (logical truths). Critics argue this distinction collapses into full necessitarianism.
  • Objection: If God’s nature necessitates creating this world, human free will and contingency are undermined. Leibniz responds with his theory of “compossible” worlds and innate harmony.

---

3. Hegel (1770–1831)

• Key Idea: Hegel’s absolute idealism treats reality as the dialectical unfolding of the Absolute Spirit. Historical and conceptual developments are necessary stages in this process.
  • Historical Necessity: All events, ideas, and entities are necessary moments in the self-realization of the Absolute. Contingency is absorbed into a grand rational structure.
  • Famous Quote: “What is rational is actual, and what is actual is rational” (Elements of the Philosophy of Right).
  • Objection: Critics argue this view dismisses genuine human freedom and reduces history to a deterministic script. Hegelians reply that freedom lies in recognizing necessity.

---

4. Jonathan Schaffer (Contemporary)

• Key Idea: Schaffer’s priority monism (the view that the cosmos as a whole is fundamental) leans toward necessitarianism. If the whole universe is the one necessary substance, its parts may inherit necessity.
  • Necessity of the Cosmos: The universe exists necessarily, and its structure is determined by metaphysically laws.
  • Objection: This conflicts with quantum indeterminacy and apparent contingency in physical laws. Schaffer argues such phenomena are consistent with a deeper necessity.

---

5. Parmenides (Pre-Socratic, c. 5th century BCE)

• Key Idea: Parmenides argued that reality is a single, unchanging, necessary unity. What exists must exist, and change/plurality are illusions.
  • Necessitarianism: “What is, is; what is not, is not.” Non-being is impossible, so all being is necessary.
  • Legacy: Influenced Spinoza and Hegel. Critics (e.g., Aristotle) rejected his denial of motion and plurality.

---

Key Arguments for Necessitarianism

1. Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR): If every fact has an explanation, contingency collapses into necessity (Leibniz).
2. Modal Collapse: If God’s nature necessitates creation, contingency disappears (applies to theistic necessitarianism).
3. Metaphysical Unity: If reality is a single substance (Spinoza) or a monistic whole (Schaffer), its existence and properties flow necessarily.

---

Criticisms of Necessitarianism

• Empirical: Observed contingency (e.g., quantum events, human choices) seems incompatible with universal necessity.
• Logical: Necessitarianism implies all truths are necessary truths, rendering modal distinctions (possible vs. actual) meaningless.
• Freedom: Denies libertarian free will and moral responsibility.

---

Modern Status

Necessitarianism remains a minority view but is defended in analytic metaphysics (e.g., necessitarians like John Divers). Critics like David Lewis (modal realist) and Saul Kripke (contingent a posteriori necessities) argue for a mixed ontology of necessary and contingent beings.

---

Conclusion

Necessitarianism challenges our intuitive grasp of contingency but offers a radically unified, deterministic metaphysics. While Spinoza and Hegel are its most famous proponents, modern philosophers continue to debate whether necessity truly governs all existence. The view’s strength lies in its explanatory simplicity; its weakness is its tension with everyday experience and science.