An oddly written piece by Adolf Grünbaum.
While I understand Grünbaum’s point that there’s no reason to assume that “nothingness” is more natural than “somethingness,” showing the flaws in Leibniz’s formulation of the cosmological question does not make this area of inquiry go away. It only requires asking the question in a slightly different way, viz., “Why does the current state of affairs obtain?”
Physicists like Sean Carroll and Max Tegmark adopt an anti-Leibnizian approach that assumes hyper-fecundity as more natural–or at least as the only way to explain creation, presumably with the anthropic principle to “explain” local fine-tuning. But attempts to go further than this pseudo-scientific explanation and show that existence is logically or mathematically necessary don’t seem to amount to much more than hand-waving.