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 Not everything in the world is perfect or good, which contradicts the claim that God includes everything and God is perfect or good.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If God includes everything and God is perfect or good, then everything which exists ought to be perfect or good.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Common experience shows that much in the world is very far from perfect or good.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Spinoza's pantheism identifies God with Nature in its totality, yet Nature demonstrably contains predation, disease, and suffering as structural features.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God is identical to the totality of Nature, and Nature contains intrinsic evils, then God cannot coherently be described as wholly perfect or good.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A being that essentially contains imperfection cannot satisfy the classical theistic definition of perfection, creating an internal contradiction in perfectionist pantheism.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.William Rowe's evidential argument establishes that gratuitous suffering—suffering serving no greater good—exists in the natural world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If God includes all things and gratuitous suffering exists within God's being, then divine perfection is not merely limited but logically undermined from within.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.No theodicy available to classical theism transfers coherently to pantheism, since pantheism cannot externalize evil as a privation outside God's nature.
      ?

      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.