Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Cleanthes' concession thus implicitly acknowledges the existence of gratuitous evil, which is logically incompatible with classical perfect-being theology as articulated by Anselm and Aquinas.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Cleanthes' concession may reflect epistemic humility about our knowledge of divine purposes, not acceptance that evil is truly gratuitous.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Classical theology can accommodate apparent gratuitous evil through divine reasons unknown to us without abandoning perfect-being attributes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A strategic rhetorical concession in dialogue doesn't constitute metaphysical commitment to incompatibility with theism's core doctrines.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Cleanthes grants that some suffering lacks morally justifying purpose, which directly contradicts omnipotence's ability to prevent all such suffering.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Classical theism requires God's omnibenevolence entails preventing gratuitous evils; any concession of their existence refutes this requirement.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Logical incompatibility is demonstrated when a being cannot simultaneously possess all divine attributes while gratuitous evil exists.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.