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
    Logical completeness requires that a theodicy account for... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→This theodicy is inadequate as a complete response to the problem of evil.

    Logical completeness requires that a theodicy account for all morally relevant instances of evil, not merely a proper subset of them.

    ?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.A theodicy claims to justify God's moral character; selective justification leaves unanswered why God permits excluded evils.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Logical consistency requires that principles explaining some evils must apply uniformly or their exceptions need independent justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If a theodicy fails for even one morally relevant instance, it undermines claims that God is both omnipotent and omnibenevolent.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.No finite account can exhaustively catalog all evils; theodicies aim to explain the *structure* of permission, not enumerate every case.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A successful explanation of why God permits suffering from disease might rationally extend to other evils without requiring separate justification for each.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Demanding complete accounting sets an impossible epistemic standard humans cannot meet regarding divine reasoning or metaphysical necessity.
      ?

      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

    A successful explanation of why God permits suffering from disease might rationa...A theodicy claims to justify God's moral character; selective justification leav...Demanding complete accounting sets an impossible epistemic standard humans canno...If a theodicy fails for even one morally relevant instance, it undermines claims...
    +3 moreShow less
    Logical consistency requires that principles explaining some evils must apply un...No finite account can exhaustively catalog all evils; theodicies aim to explain ...This theodicy is inadequate as a complete response to the problem of evil.

    Details

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