Voltaire and Candide

As Opposed to Leibniz's "Philosophical Optimism"

Voltaire uses the character Pangloss to satirize the brilliant and highly influential philosopher and mathematician Leibniz: (1646-1716). As a mathematician, Leibniz, independently of Newton, invented or formalized Symbolic Logic, also known as calculus. As a philosopher, Leibniz also argued that we could use symbolic logic to understand God’s creation: math/logic can explain God's will.

Leibniz method uses exceptionally formal DEDUCTIVE LOGIC to find truth, versus the emerging Locke-an Empiricism, as best exemplified by Newton's method and laws.

In contrast to Descartes, who argued theories must start with knowns, with only ideas that are proven, and work from there, Leibniz begins with an a priori: a basic assumption underlying his argument that is independent of factual support. Leibniz assumes God made the universe, God is omnipotent, God is all good, and God is omniscient. Yet where is the proof that any of these are truly known? How can these be proven or disproved?

Sufficient Reason: All things or effects must have a cause. Yet one cannot trace the ultimate, original cause of anything back to nothing; thus: there must be an original cause of all things, the original cause is God. Or, the fact that there must be an original cause of all things proves the existence of God.

Optimism: FORMAL LOGIC CAN BE USED TO UNDERSTAND GOD’S INTENTION

Premise: God created the universe

Premise: God’s creation is logically ordered

Premise: God is all knowing and all good

Premise: An all good god would only create a world with the minimum evil

Premise: God could not create a perfect world because only God can be perfect

Premise: Thus, this is the best of all possible worlds

Conclusion: Logic reveals all things happen for the best: Optimism: God created the best of all possible worlds.

In contrast with Locke, Leibniz isn't concerned with the world he observes but with the world his mathematical formula can prove; the entire plot of Candide suggests that the world we can directly, empirically observe does not match the mathematical formula: Leibniz blames our observations, and Voltaire blames the faulty logic: we trust logic over what we can all see and verify in the actual world.

So the philosophical concept being debated between Leibniz and Voltaire comes down to: which should we trust more: logic or observation. Good scientific reasoning, Voltaire would argue, is evidenced only when the two prove each other; if the observations don't match the formula, you haven't yet found the truth.

From this point on, philosophy, theology and science become three separate ways of thinking.

For more than you want to know about Leibniz...

Also see: Alexander Pope: “Essay on Man” (anthology 293) “to vindicate the ways of God to man” (294) “whatever is, is right” Pope's poem defends Leibniz Philosophical Optimism.

Newton vs. Leibniz

Newton: (1642-1727) Celestial Clockwork or Clockwork Universe (note relationship to calculus): God created a structured universe that operates along mathematical/logical principals; thus formal logic/math/calculus can be used to understand God’s design.

Newton's theories are critiqued by more traditional philosophers and theologians because they only explain how and not why; when pushed to explain why gravity functions as it does -- what primary causal forces are at work -- the Newtonians famously answer "we don't know". Voltaire is impressed with Newton's refusal to speculate on causes beyond those he can observe or prove.

This similarity and contrast between Leibniz and Newton is key: Both invented calculus. Both believe formal logic could be used to unlock the secrets of God's so called Celestial Clockwork. Yet Newton incorporated formal logic with empiricism: close observation of natural phenomena. Leibniz argues logic alone can determine that which is beyond observation.

Voltaire and Religion:

Voltaire and Deism:

Deism: "One who believes in the existence of a God or supreme being but denies revealed religion, basing his belief on the light of nature and reason." Webster’s Encyclopedic Dictionary.

“Deism, in its every manifestation was opposed to the current and traditional teaching of revealed religion.”

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04679b.htm

Basically: God created an ordered universe (so, yes, Voltaire and traditional Deists would have been "Creationists" in this sense). The universe operates according to natural laws. Scientific enquiry can explain these natural laws. That is, reason/science can explain the natural, observable world. However, God's will is not revealed, either through magical processes, or through the natural world. Revealed religion is considered "absurd":
a) why would an omnipotent God only talk to some people some time and not others
b) all people of all religions believe God talks to them, not others
c) faith is a belief in what can't be proven or observed, and the realm of science is the realm of that which can be proven and observed by all.

Thus: science explains the natural world; nothing explains God's will. Therefore philosophers and scientists should stop trying.

Voltaire: God’s will is not revealed and cannot be known. Philosophy does not lead to happiness. "let us work without theorizing (arguing)" (as representative of British Empiricism: privilege experience over theory) However, Cartesian/Lockean principles (as well as knowledge, learning, science) can be applied to create a better, happier society.

Enlightenment: A better society through reason, knowledge.

THUS: The Enlightened response to tragedies like the Lisbon earthquake is:
a) react to what is readily observable: that people are suffering
b) use science to mitigate human suffering
c) use science to understand how these things occur and engineer solutions to avoid subsequent destruction
d) admit that human suffering is awful, terrible: respect suffering and react with love; do not write it off as "for the best"

Compare to Tartuffe: note similar, if not identical, considerations of good and evil, reason as common-sense, skepticism and experience (Empiricism and Radical Doubt/Method aka Inductive Logic) vs. Authority (religious or aristocratic) and deductive logic and a priori.

Lisbon Earthquake and The Problem of Evil

Lisbon earthquake (All Saints Day, 1755): 60,000 to 100,000 innocent die.

How can an inherently good God create such immense human suffering among the innocent?

Voltaire's reaction to the immense human suffering caused by this earthquake signals his break with Philosophical Optimism. Voltaire is infuriated by how Christians blame the earthquake on providence, as if God were punishing the Portuguese for their sins -- why then would God kill tens of thousands of children? -- and disgusted with the way his fellow French philosophers and much of Europe write the earthquake off as "for the best".

Saying that suffering is "for the best" essentially, Voltaire argues, pretends it doesn't exist: it is inhumane. In this way, we see that Voltaire is calling for less philosophizing and more humanism.

Voltaire’s poem “The Lisbon Earthquake” http://www.aestheticrealism.net/poetry/Lisbon-Voltaire.htm

James the Anabaptist (Ch 5) pg. 318 CONTRAST WITH PANGLOSS/LEIBNIZ; truth thru actions/experience (Locke) vs. Optimism/logic; good=common-sense and action vs. religious-philosophical hypocrisy.

Voltaire the Anti-Semite, Anti-Cleric, Champion of Toleration

“More than any other figure in Western history, Voltaire will transform “intolerance” into a vice and “toleration” into a virtue.” -- Alan Kors

Voltaire is a bigot. He loathes Judaism for its emphasis on a god that would chose one people over all others -- a quality clearly at odds with egalitarian democracy. He loathes priests (he was educated by Jesuits) for their emphasis on superstition, ritual and the supernatural -- qualities clearly at odds with science and reason. He loathes reformation Protestants for their return to puritanical authoritarianism -- at odds with the inherent freedom of the individual.

But in the 1760s-1770s Voltaire becomes the voice in defense of these same groups, risking his reputation on protecting their civil liberties and repeatedly intervening to protect the legal rights of religious minorities.

1. In the Calas affair, a Protestant family was accused of having hanged a son, who was depressed and suicidal, because the son was going to convert to Catholicism. The father was tortured and killed, and the daughters were sent to nunneries. Voltaire saw that this was a case of judicial murder and undertook to rehabilitate the family and to have the verdict overturned.

2. In a similar case, the Protestant Sirvan family was accused of murdering a daughter who had actually committed suicide. Voltaire succeeded in having the case reexamined and used the matter to bring about revisions in the judicial process, while isolating religious intolerance as the cause of such abuse.

3. Finally, in the La Barre affair, Voltaire was appalled by the case of a nineteen-year-old, poor aristocrat with no family, who was tortured and burned for having allegedly mutilated a crucifix. Among the evidence against him was a copy of Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary, which had been found on the young man’s shelf.
(Source: Alan Kors) (the links to Wikipedia summaries of these cases do much to explain the religious climate in France at the time, and the profound effect Voltaire had on changing it)

Voltaire universalizes and popularizes the Toleration his hero, John Locke, had used to end the English Civil War.

Enlightenment Values and Revolution, Democracy:

Man's problems are not theological and God's will is unknown to man. Thus, mankind must use Reason and apply Enlightenment principles and values to create solutions to human problems. Mankind has the ability and need to solve its own problems, and the solutions are to be found thru Reason: the application of Analytical, Empirical, "Scientific" thinking.

Just as Newton proved "Natural Laws" govern all natural phenomena, and all natural phenomena can thus be explained thru rational, scientific enquiry, so too can man discover the natural laws governing right behavior and create rational, just systems of governance. This idea is Voltaire's gift to mankind, and it pretty well summarizes what we mean by "The Enlightenment".

Voltaire, however, does not advocate or believe in what we'd consider universal suffrage or democracy. He distrusts "the rabble" and advocates "enlightening" the aristocracy and church to create governance thru "enlightened despots". Note the similarities to Plato's argument for "philosopher kings" in The Republic.

But just as Martin Luther didn't intend for the Protestantism and the Reformation to lead toward further democratic revolutions, Voltaire's philosophy inadvertently becomes the cornerstone of the American and French Revolutions.

Both Martin Luther and Voltaire set out to REFORM THE CHURCH AND EXISTING STATE AUTHORITIES, but their philosophies led to the spread of revolution AGAINST the authority of both the church and state and, most importantly, universal suffrage.

This philosophy becomes codified in The Declaration of Independence (1776), The Constitution, Declaration of the Rights of Man (1789), Vindication of the Rights of Women (1791)