The Law of Sufficient Reason states that everything must have a reason or a cause. Sir William Hamilton, a Scottish meta-physician, (1788-1856) expressed this law as such: ”Infer nothing without ground or reason.”
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) was a German philosopher who developed differential and integral calculus independently of Isaac Newton said something close to this: Any contingent fact about the world must have an explanation.
The relationship between Reason and Consequent are as follows:
- For every object A, there is a sufficient explanation why A object exist.
- For every event B, there is sufficient explanation why B event occurred.
- For every proposition C, there is sufficient explanation why proposition C is true.
Another way to put this is: If A then B (A implies B).
If you have had children, you have used this law thousands of times. Let me give you an example. Grandfather (me) took the grandchildren to the beach. I asked them to wash all of the sand off before getting into the pool. I got to the pool and sand was all over the steps and in the shallow end that they were playing.
I asked them, “How did all of the sand get into the pool?” The smart one blamed the dog. They knew they were caught when I asked them why there was no sand at the shower. Sufficient reason.
Have you ever heard an insufficient reason for something your child had done? The reason for a consequent must be sufficient to explain it.
Let me ask you about the Law of Sufficient Reason in terms of Is Evolution A Theory. Let us ask about how life evolved from the earth.
Can rock, sand, dirt and maybe water join together and create a one cell life form? Here are four explanations on the internet:
- Maybe a hot volcanic pool. See the Scientific American article here.
- Indeed, some scientists think life appeared the moment our planet’s environment was stable enough to support it. See the Life Science article here.
- Maybe nobody know BUT, as the BBC admits, “So far nobody has managed it, but we have come a long way. See the BBC article here.
- Maybe there was more than one origin. David Deamer, a biochemist at the University of California, Santa Cruz. “… we don’t necessarily claim there was just a single origin, but just an origin that didn’t happen to get blasted by giant [asteroid] impacts.” Read Mr. Deamer’s quote here.
Note that it is not my intent to pick on anyone that I have referenced herein. Forgive me for cutting this short and not giving more examples of what scientist think. The fact is that many scientist and science organizations propose a “possible” reason for the consequent of life on earth. But nobody knows.
Why can nobody explain it or reproduce this creation act in the labortory? The answer my friend is the Law of Sufficient Reason. You have to have a big reason to explain the creation of a cell from non-living material with all of its energy need, RNA, DNA, exterior membrane, reproduction by dividing, lipids, proteins, etc.
Is Evolution A Theory challenges you to research the cell on the internet. Here is a quick read “What is a Cell?” at Genetics Home Reference website. You should find a complex and amazing “consequent”. Does the theory of evolution provide a sufficient reason for life on planet earth?
Remember, we are talking about the Theory of Evolution being a scientific theory. No theory, including the theory of evolution can be a viable theory if it violates other scientific theories. That is a FACT.