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 The free will defense does not provide a complete solution to the problem of evil.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.John Hick's soul-making theodicy treats natural evil as a necessary condition for the development of virtues like courage, compassion, and moral seriousness.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If natural evils serve as the indispensable environment for human moral and spiritual development, they require no separate defense beyond the teleological framework the free will defense already presupposes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The claim that a 'residuum' of natural evil remains unaddressed assumes the free will defense must stand alone, ignoring that theodicies are cumulative and complementary.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Alvin Plantinga's free will defense can be extended to natural evil by positing that fallen angels or demonic agents exercise free will in causing natural disasters.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If non-human free agents are responsible for natural evil, then the free will defense applies to the full range of evils, not merely moral evil produced by humans.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The free will defense deals only with moral evil.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Not all sorrows and failures of the world can be categorized as moral evil.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if the free will defense succeeds, there remains a residuum of natural evil to be addressed.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The free will defense deals only with moral evil.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Not all of the sorrows and failures of the world can be gathered under the category of moral evil.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even if the free will defense succeeds, there will remain a residuum of natural evil to be addressed.
      ?

      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.