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
    The argument from evil should be formulated as an evident... — Carmelics
    Home/Problem of Evil
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The argument from evil should be formulated as an evidential (inductive/probabilistic) argument for the claim that existing evils make it unlikely that God exists, rather than as a deductive argument for the impossibility of God and evil coexisting.

    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.A key premise such as (1) cannot, at least at present, be established deductively.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the premise cannot be established deductively, the only possibility is to offer some sort of inductive argument in support of it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If an inductive step is required, it is best to make that crucial inductive step explicit in the formulation of the argument.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Mackie's logical argument succeeds because omnipotence and perfect goodness entail the elimination of all evil, making coexistence strictly contradictory.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the logical incompatibility holds a priori, recasting the argument as probabilistic concedes too much to theistic replies like Plantinga's Free Will Defense.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A successful deductive argument, if sound, is always stronger than a probabilistic one that merely shifts burdens of evidence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Rowe's evidential formulation relies on the claim that gratuitous evils probably exist, which itself presupposes contested background assumptions about divine purposes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the probabilistic argument requires contested assumptions about what God would likely permit, the inductive step imports hidden theological commitments that undermine its secular force.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.A deductive argument from conceptual analysis of omnipotence and goodness avoids this dependence on empirical probability judgments about inscrutable divine reasons.
      ?

      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

    Key Terms

    Argument from evil(as used in philosophy of religion)
    A famous philosophical challenge that asks: if God is all-powerful and all-good, why does evil and suffering exist in the world? It's one of the strongest arguments people use when questioning whether God exists.
    Evidential argument(as used in logic and argumentation)
    A type of argument that uses evidence to show something is probably true, rather than definitely true—like saying 'these clues suggest the butler did it' instead of 'the butler definitely did it.'
    Impossibility of God and evil coexisting(as used in philosophy of religion)
    The claim that it's logically impossible for God (understood as all-powerful and all-good) and evil to both exist at the same time—one rules out the other.
    deductive argument(Classification of argument structures for miracle claims)
    An argument in which, given the truth of the premises, the conclusion must also be true.
    inductive argument(contrasted with deductively valid arguments)
    An argument that is not valid — it is possible for all its premises to be true while its conclusion is false — but which can still transmit justification on non-deductivist views.
    probabilistic argument(Classification of argument structures for miracle claims)
    An argument that aims to show that the conclusion is more probable than not, more probable than some fixed standard (e.g., 0.99), or far more probable given the evidence adduced than it is considered independent of that evidence.

    Related

    A deductive argument from conceptual analysis of omnipotence and goodness avoids...A key premise such as (1) cannot, at least at present, be established deductivel...A successful deductive argument, if sound, is always stronger than a probabilist...If an inductive step is required, it is best to make that crucial inductive step...
    +5 moreShow less
    If the logical incompatibility holds a priori, recasting the argument as probabi...If the premise cannot be established deductively, the only possibility is to off...

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: evil
    View source passageHide passage
    The argument from evil focuses upon the fact that the world appears to contain states of affairs that are bad, or undesirable, or that should have been prevented by any being that could have done so, and it asks how the existence of such states of affairs is to be squared with the existence of God. But the argument can be formulated in two very different ways. First, it can be formulated as a purely deductive argument that attempts to show that there are certain facts about the evil in the world that are logically incompatible with the existence of God. One especially ambitious form of this...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit
    If the probabilistic argument requires contested assumptions about what God woul...
    Mackie's logical argument succeeds because omnipotence and perfect goodness enta...
    Rowe's evidential formulation relies on the claim that gratuitous evils probably...

    Similar

    The argument from evil may or may not be sound, since one or more of i...87%The argument from evil supports only a probabilistic conclusion.86%Even if the evidential argument from evil is sound, its conclusion is ...86%If one is defending a probabilistic version of the argument from evil,...85%