According to Leibniz’s philosophy, the best possible world is the one which harmonizes social relations and generates goodness and perfection. The harmonious world relies on metaphysical goodness that is typical of all lifeless creatures. The harmonious world should also satisfy the simplicity criterion and introduce happiness and beauty.
Because harmonious world is based on metaphysical goodness and therefore, individuals living in this world should practice virtue for the glory of God. Therefore, practice and existence of goodness conception is congruent with existence of God. The good is aimed at promoting physical, moral and metaphysical values.
With regard to the above-presented explanation, it can be argued that, if God exists, the best possible world exists as well. Everything that is created by God should be perfect and there are no better analogues to the things that the creator introduced to the world. However, the world is full of inconsistencies and imperfections and, therefore, the existence of the best possible world refutes the idea of God’s perfection.
It also rejects any wrong and evil actions because goodness, particularly moral goodness, admits the possibility of bad and good actions as a part of a human being. Therefore, by posing the argument about the existence of God, Leibniz refutes the possibility of evil existence because it would contradict the omnipotence of deity, as well as His aspiration to perfection.
While developing the argument at issue, Leibniz tries to avoid the idea that everything is necessary because the philosopher believes that God is free from these limits. Moreover, the Creator is the one who chooses the best possible world; He would not have selected a worse world because God did not plan to create worse world. One way or another, God always has choice whether it is necessary to create the most appropriate world or not.
So, the Creator is responsible for the harmonious because He has a sufficient reason for it. Hence, the genesis of the world is not due to the necessity, but to God’s genuine moral nature, which is sufficient for the existence of the best possible world. Deliberating on the nature God as the perfect being whose actions are internally moral, creating an imperfect would nevertheless be regarded as the best of all possible worlds.
Apart from the denial of evil, God as a perfect being cannot create any world, except for the best one. If Good embodies perfection, there is no possibility for creating imperfect world and, therefore, bad actions and vices are created for sufficient reason as well.
Evil is created by God because nothing in this world exists independently from God. Because God is sufficient, the reasons for creating unity and diversity in the world are also justified. According to Leibniz, the existence of deity is metaphysically predetermined. Consequently, the underpinning for shaping a morally good world stem’s the necessity of introducing perfection..
While deliberating on the argument of God’s creation of the best possible world, specific emphasis should be placed on concept of Devine freedom. Following Leibniz’s philosophical assumptions, there is a possibility that God could create a range of worlds in which there are no living creatures at all, except for dead matter. There is another hypothesis concerning the creation of the world in which all conscious creatures have meaningful and morally happy lives.
If there is a chance that God had to choose between these two variants, the last variant should be the most obvious. Certainly, a world with living creatures observing moral rules should be better than the one in which these principles are absent. Pursuing these deliberations leads to some contradictions. The fact that the second world is much better than the previously proposed one means the God was confined to two choices only.
Under these circumstances, the Divine creator faces three choices: forming an inferior world, choosing superior world, or creating no worlds. So, God’s decision to create the world, as compared to leaving everything unchanged, proves that the existing world is virtuous and harmonious. In this case, God’s virtuous nature and perfect goodness make him create the best world rather than vicious one.
The presence of choices the Creator faces indicates His freedom. On the one hand, God personifies an absolute goodness, which implies developing the best of all possible worlds. On the other hand, the freedom of choices admits the possibility that God can choose inferior world. The emerged contradiction should be solved through analysis of the problem of divine freedom and divine perfection.
Presenting God as absolute moral perfection implies that the created world personifies goodness and morale. Therefore, a morally good individual should have available methods for performing the best action. At the same time, he/she is also free not to do anything good because of the possibility of choice. Therefore, in case a person accomplishes a morally wrong action, he/she can experience moral failing.
The problem is that, although there is a possibility of doing bad actions, God cannot be considered less omnipotent. The assumption is proved because the right to make immoral decisions is not the part of a human nature. Similarly to this argument, God cannot be ignorant, week or imperfect; rather, He should possess supreme power, and knowledge. Therefore, perfection is an inborn quality of deity, but not an acquired attribute.
While humans are free to lose their goodness by making wrong choices, God has the right to ignore his perfections through the freedom of pursuing the bad. However, his internally moral nature does not allow the Create to make wrong choices because God cannot be less perfect.
The above presented contradiction between freedom and perfection explains Leibniz’s hypothesis of the existence of God, as well as the best possible world. Because God is not limited in creating the best world, nothing beyond his liberty can prevent him from the world genesis.
Because the divine world is the most appropriate and most harmonious one, it also identifies God as a harmonious being. In this respect, divine freedom is taken from existence of external forces that allowed him for the world. At the same time, if the existence of external forces is justified, it is impossible to assume that God is omnipotent. Therefore, nothing outside God controls and determines which action should be carried out.
With regard to the above-presented government, it can be stated that God does exist; he embodies perfection and goodness and he is free of making the best choices. Therefore, the world He created is considered the most harmonious one. The internally moral nature of deity premised on metaphysical goodness does not allow God to create inferior world, although he is free of making choices.