Skip to content

Topics Thinkers Changes ContributorsLoading 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

Made within

DC&

Austin

Statements: 321,452
Perspectives: 108,905
Topics: 42

It is surprising that discussions of the argument from ev... — Carmelics

Home/Problem of Evil

History Edit See Inverse

It is surprising that discussions of the argument from evil have not centered mainly upon concrete formulations.

Problem of Evil

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

1 reason for

2 reasons against

Reasons For

1 perspective

Reason for

?

1.Some authors seem to focus almost exclusively upon very abstract versions of the argument.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Given the obvious nature of the preceding observations, one would have expected discussions to center on concrete formulations.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reasons Against

2 perspectives

Reason against 1 of 2

?

1.Abstract formulations of the argument from evil are methodologically prior, as they isolate the logical structure from contingent empirical disputes.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Philosophers like Mackie and Pike deliberately chose abstract formulations to test whether theism is internally inconsistent, independent of any specific evil.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.A logically valid abstract refutation of theism is more philosophically decisive than any accumulation of concrete cases, which a theist can always explain away individually.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

Reason against 2 of 2

?

1.The evidential turn initiated by Rowe in 1979 did substantially center discussion on concrete cases like the fawn dying in a forest fire, falsifying the claim historically.
?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.Subsequent literature by Wykstra, Draper, and Swinburne explicitly engages with particular categories of suffering, showing the field did shift toward concrete formulations.
?
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.

Topics

Problem of Evil

Related

A logically valid abstract refutation of theism is more philosophically decisive...Abstract formulations of the argument from evil are methodologically prior, as t...Given the obvious nature of the preceding observations, one would have expected ...Philosophers like Mackie and Pike deliberately chose abstract formulations to te...

+3 moreShow less

Some authors seem to focus almost exclusively upon very abstract versions of the...Subsequent literature by Wykstra, Draper, and Swinburne explicitly engages with ...The evidential turn initiated by Rowe in 1979 did substantially center discussio...

Similar

Versions of the argument from evil differ significantly with respect t...80%The argument from evil may or may not be sound, since one or more of i...80%Any axiological formulation of the argument from evil is incomplete in...80%The argument from evil should be formulated as an evidential (inductiv...79%

Source

AI-extracted

View source passageHide passage

Given that the preceding observations are rather obvious ones, one might have expected that discussions of the argument from evil would have centered mainly upon concrete formulations of the argument. Rather surprisingly, that has not been so. Indeed, some authors seem to focus almost exclusively upon very abstract versions of the argument.

Details

Type: claim
Perspectives: 3 (1 for, 2 against)
Edits: 1 edit