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 previous two suggestions about what a defense require... — Carmelics
    Home/Problem of Evil
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The story involved in a defense must be one that is likely to be true.

    The previous two suggestions about what a defense requires have apparently failed.

    Problem of Evil
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Problem of Evil

    Related

    The story involved in a defense must be one that is likely to be true.

    Similar

    A defense differs from a theodicy in that a defense attempts to show o...71%

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Problem of Evil
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    The story involved in a defense must be one that is likely to be true.66%
    A defense need merely show that it is likely that there are reasons wh...65%
    A defense against the problem of evil does not require a story that ca...64%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: evil
    View source passageHide passage
    Given the apparent failure of the previous two suggestions, a natural conclusion is that the story that is involved in a defense must be one that is likely to be true. But if this is right, how does a defense differ from a theodicy? The answer is that while a theodicy must specify reasons that would suffice to justify an omnipotent and omniscient being in allowing all of the evils found in the world, a defense need merely show that it is likely that there are reasons which would justify an omnipotent and omniscient being in not preventing the evils that one finds in the world, even if one do...

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective