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 good of libertarian free will requires the possibilit... — Carmelics
    Home/Problem of Evil
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The good of libertarian free will requires the possibility of moral evil.

    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 world with libertarian free will is better than one without it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.God would have good reason to create such a world.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Even God cannot ensure that no one with libertarian free will would ever choose moral wrongdoing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.God, being omnipotent, could have actualized a world where free agents always freely choose good, as Mackie argued in 'Evil and Omnipotence' (1955).
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If such a world is logically possible, the necessity of permitting moral evil for the sake of free will collapses.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Plantinga's free will defense applies only to moral evil, leaving natural evil—earthquakes, disease, child suffering—entirely unexplained by appeals to human freedom.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theodicy that accounts for only one category of evil while ignoring the other fails as a comprehensive defense of theism against the problem of evil.
      ?

      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

    Related

    A theodicy that accounts for only one category of evil while ignoring the other ...A world with libertarian free will is better than one without it.Even God cannot ensure that no one with libertarian free will would ever choose ...God would have good reason to create such a world.
    +3 moreShow less
    God, being omnipotent, could have actualized a world where free agents always fr...If such a world is logically possible, the necessity of permitting moral evil fo...Plantinga's free will defense applies only to moral evil, leaving natural evil—e...

    Similar

    Even God cannot ensure that no one with libertarian free will would ev...86%If the possible actions open to one vary enormously in moral worth, th...84%God would have a good reason for creating a world with individuals who...81%An appeal to libertarian free will is problematic.81%

    Source

    AI-extracted2/3 agreementValid
    SEP: evil
    View source passageHide passage
    Many people claim, however, that the world is a better place if it contains individuals who possess libertarian free will, rather than individuals who are free only in a sense that is compatible with one’s actions being completely determined. If this claim can be made plausible, one can argue, first, that God would have a good reason for creating a world with individuals who possessed libertarian free will, but secondly, that if he did choose to create such a world, even he could not ensure that no one would ever choose to do something morally wrong. The good of libertarian free will requires...
    Extraction notes

    Validity: The premises collectively establish that libertarian free will is a good worth creating and that it inherently cannot exist without the possibility of moral evil, which directly supports the conclusion, and this argument is explicitly present in the source passage.

    Confidence: This is the overall conclusion of the passage, synthesizing the preceding premises.

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit