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
    If the co-existence of God and evil is logically possible... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→When one conceives of God as unlimited with respect to power, knowledge, and moral goodness, the existence of evil quickly gives rise to potentially serious arguments against the existence of God.

    If the co-existence of God and evil is logically possible, then evil's existence does not generate a 'serious argument' but merely an emotional or probabilistic challenge.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Logical possibility and metaphysical reality are distinct; showing co-existence is logically possible undermines deductive arguments.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The problem of evil's force depends on necessity claims; if God+evil is merely improbable rather than contradictory, it's not a proof.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Emotional or probabilistic challenges, while important, carry less argumentative weight than logical demonstrations of contradiction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Logical possibility alone doesn't resolve the evidential problem: our actual world contains vast suffering, not merely possible worlds.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Distinguishing 'serious' arguments from emotional ones prejudges what counts as philosophical rigor; suffering's reality *is* evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Inductive arguments from observed evil can be rigorous and 'serious' regardless of whether deductive contradictions exist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

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

    Connections

    1 topic

    Problem of Evil1 linked

    Related

    Distinguishing 'serious' arguments from emotional ones prejudges what counts as ...Emotional or probabilistic challenges, while important, carry less argumentative...Inductive arguments from observed evil can be rigorous and 'serious' regardless ...Logical possibility alone doesn't resolve the evidential problem: our actual wor...
    +3 moreShow less
    Logical possibility and metaphysical reality are distinct; showing co-existence ...The problem of evil's force depends on necessity claims; if God+evil is merely i...When one conceives of God as unlimited with respect to power, knowledge, and mor...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit