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
    There is at least some non-zero probability that God does... — Carmelics
    Home/Problem of Evil
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    There is at least some non-zero probability that God does not exist, given our background knowledge (premise 2 holds).

    Problem of Evil
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    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.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Only necessarily false propositions have a probability equal to zero.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.The probability of God not existing given background knowledge can be zero only if the conjunction of God's non-existence and background knowledge is necessarily false.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.That conjunction is necessarily false only if God's existence is a necessary truth or background knowledge entails God's existence.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.If God is a maximally perfect being, God's existence is either necessary or impossible, leaving no probabilistic middle ground.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Alvin Plantinga's modal ontological argument establishes that if God is possible, God exists in all possible worlds, making non-existence have probability zero.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore P4 is false: God's existence being a necessary truth is precisely what classical theism and modal logic jointly entail.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Richard Swinburne argues background knowledge itself includes the fine-tuned existence of a universe, which raises the posterior probability of God toward certainty.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If background knowledge inductively entails God's existence with probability approaching 1, then P(~God | background knowledge) converges to zero without requiring strict logical entailment.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.P4's claim that background knowledge does not entail God's existence conflates deductive entailment with overwhelming inductive support, making the premise too narrow.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Topics

    Problem of Evil

    Key Terms

    knowledge(Distinguished from mere true belief, which may be the product of indoctrination and need not exercise deliberative capacities.)
    Justified true belief — true belief that has been arrived at through the exercise of deliberative capacities, including comparison of and deliberation among alternatives.

    Related

    Alvin Plantinga's modal ontological argument establishes that if God is possible...If God is a maximally perfect being, God's existence is either necessary or impo...If background knowledge inductively entails God's existence with probability app...Neither God's existence being a necessary truth nor background knowledge entaili...
    +7 moreShow less
    Only necessarily false propositions have a probability equal to zero.P4's claim that background knowledge does not entail God's existence conflates d...Richard Swinburne argues background knowledge itself includes the fine-tuned exi...That conjunction is necessarily false only if God's existence is a necessary tru...The probability of God not existing given background knowledge can be zero only ...Therefore P4 is false: God's existence being a necessary truth is precisely what...Therefore the probability of God not existing given background knowledge is not ...

    Similar

    If it is necessary that such a being exists, then the proposition that...90%The probability of God not existing given background knowledge can be ...88%Therefore the probability of God not existing given background knowled...87%If the probability of God's nonexistence is zero on any body of eviden...87%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: evil
    View source passageHide passage
    As regards (2), it certainly seems plausible, assuming that the existence of God is not logically necessary, that there is at least some non-zero probability that God does not exist, given our background knowledge. But one can derive (2), provided that one is willing to accept the (not uncontroversial) principle that only necessarily false propositions have a probability equal to zero. (This principle is very plausible if one accepts the idea of infinitesimals. If one does not, one may hold that some contingent propositions have a probability equal to zero.) Given this assumption, the reasonin...

    Details

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