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 One can derive a formula giving the probability that God does not exist relative to information about the number of apparent evils in the world.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Logical probability requires a prior probability space over possible worlds, but no non-arbitrary such space exists for theistic hypotheses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Carnap's inductive logic programs collapsed precisely because assigning logical probabilities across metaphysical hypotheses requires substantive commitments that cannot be derived from logic alone.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Without a principled prior for divine existence, any formula purporting to calculate P(~God | evil) smuggles in empirical or theological assumptions, rendering it non-logical.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The reference class of 'apparent evils' is theory-laden: whether an event counts as evil depends on background moral and theological commitments that are themselves contested.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Alston argued that our cognitive faculties are demonstrably unreliable for assessing whether God has sufficient reasons for permitting specific evils, undermining the evidential weight assigned to each counted instance.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.A substantive theory of inductive logic, or logical probability, can be brought to bear upon the argument from evil.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.When this is done, the probability that God does not exist can be calculated relative to the number of apparent evils found in the world.
      ?

      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.