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 probability that there is an omnipotent, omniscient, ... — Carmelics
    Home/Problem of Evil
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    The probability that there is an omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect person must be very low indeed.

    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.Of the billions of people and sentient non-persons who have existed, the proportion who have never suffered in ways such that the known wrongmaking properties of allowing such suffering outweighed the known rightmaking properties must be small.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The upper bound on the probability that unknown rightmaking properties outweigh known wrongmaking properties in any given case is very low.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Accordingly, the number n of cases of such suffering must be extremely large, which drives the overall probability very low.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The inference from 'no known rightmaking property justifies this suffering' to 'no rightmaking property justifies this suffering' commits the fallacy of epistemic hubris, as Wykstra's CORNEA principle demonstrates.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A being of infinite cognitive depth would possess morally relevant reasons so far exceeding human comprehension that our probability estimates over unknown justifiers are not merely uncertain but systematically unreliable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Because the sample space of possible divine reasons is not bounded by human cognition, Bayesian calculations treating unknown rightmakers as low-probability are methodologically ill-formed from the outset.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Swinburne and van Inwagen argue that the goods of soul-making, moral agency, and epistemic freedom require a world with precisely the kind and quantity of suffering we observe, making high suffering counts evidentially neutral.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If the threshold quantity of suffering necessary to produce serious moral agents and deep compassion is empirically indeterminate, then a large n of suffering cases cannot by itself lower the probability of theism without begging the question against these theodicies.
      ?

      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 being of infinite cognitive depth would possess morally relevant reasons so fa...Accordingly, the number n of cases of such suffering must be extremely large, wh...Because the sample space of possible divine reasons is not bounded by human cogn...If the threshold quantity of suffering necessary to produce serious moral agents...
    +4 moreShow less
    Of the billions of people and sentient non-persons who have existed, the proport...Swinburne and van Inwagen argue that the goods of soul-making, moral agency, and...The inference from 'no known rightmaking property justifies this suffering' to '...The upper bound on the probability that unknown rightmaking properties outweigh ...

    Similar

    Therefore, although there may be an omnipotent and omniscient person, ...84%Given the existence of evil, an omnipotent and omniscient person would...82%If that person is not morally perfect, then there is no omnipotent, om...82%There is no omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect person.80%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: evil
    View source passageHide passage
    The upper bound, moreover, is surely very low indeed, for of the billions of people and sentient non-persons who have existed, the proportion who have had the good fortune never to have suffered in ways such that the known wrongmaking properties of allowing such suffering outweighed the known rightmaking properties must be small. Accordingly, \(n\) must be extremely large, and thus the probability that there is an omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect person must be very low indeed.

    Details

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