Mackie and Plantinga both recognize that modal intuitions pumping the ontological argument can be undermined by equally valid intuitions that a world of gratuitous suffering is possible without God.

?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.

Gratuitous suffering(in philosophy of religion): Pain or hardship that seems pointless and serves no greater purpose—used as an argument against the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing God.
Intuitions (in philosophy)(the instinctive beliefs being evaluated): Gut-level beliefs or judgments that seem obviously true to us without needing proof, like how it intuitively feels wrong to hurt innocent people.
Mackie: # Mackie J.L. Mackie was a 20th-century British philosopher best known for his work in ethics and the philosophy of religion. He argued that moral values don't actually exist objectively in the world, even though we talk and think about them as if they do—a view called "moral error theory." His ideas challenged traditional beliefs about right and wrong, influencing how philosophers today think about the foundations of morality.
Plantinga: Alvin Plantinga is an American philosopher best known for his work on the philosophy of religion, particularly his arguments defending religious belief as rational and reasonable. He developed influential ideas about how people can rationally believe in God without needing scientific proof, arguing that faith and reason aren't necessarily in conflict. His work has shaped modern religious philosophy and made him one of the most important Christian philosophers of the past 50 years.

Based on where you are in your exploration