Alvin Plantinga's free will defense requires that God cannot both grant libertarian freedom and guarantee reparative outcomes, meaning the reparability premise silently presupposes compatibilist constraints that undercut the freedom defense itself.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Alvin Plantinga(as the originator of the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism): A contemporary American philosopher known for arguing that belief in God is rational without needing scientific proof, and for challenging the idea that evolution supports atheism.
Free Will Defense(Sometimes used narrowly to cover only evil resulting from human action, but extended by some to cover evils caused by supernatural agents other than God): A version of the Greater Good Defense proposing that free creatures who can care for each other and whose welfare depends on each other's freely chosen action constitute a good that requires the possibility of persons harming each other
Presupposes(as describing what Plantinga's argument takes for granted): Assumes something to be true without proving it—like how an argument might presuppose that logic works, without first arguing that logic is valid.
Reparability premise(as the hidden assumption being critiqued)

Based on where you are in your exploration