A reply to Schlesinger's theodicy

Religious Studies 43 (4):481-486 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In "Religion and Scientific Method," George Schlesinger presented a strikingly original theodicy. In this paper, I explain the strategy underlying Schlesinger's argument. I then present a parallel argument to indicate the weakness of Schlesinger's theodicy. Finally, I show that Schlesinger's theodicy assumes a false principle, and therefore fails

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

A reply to Schlesinger.L. Nathan Oaklander - 1985 - Philosophical Quarterly 35 (138):93-94.
Twice told tales: A reply to Schlesinger. [REVIEW]L. Jonathan Cohen - 1991 - Philosophical Studies 62 (2):197 - 200.
McHarry's Theodicy: A Reply.R. K. Perkins - 1980 - Analysis 40 (3):168 - 171.
Reply to criticisms by G. Schlesinger.Reginald O. Kapp - 1960 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 11 (41):59-62.
Reply to note by G. Schlesinger.Reginald O. Kapp - 1960 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 11 (44):329-331.
The problem of evil revisited a reply to Schlesinger.Jay F. Rosenberg - 1970 - Journal of Value Inquiry 4 (3):212-218.
Swinburne on providence.Richard M. Gale - 2000 - Religious Studies 36 (2):209-219.
Is the Problem of Evil a Problem for Descartes?Brett Gaul - 2004 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 78:209-220.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
37 (#422,084)

6 months
3 (#1,002,413)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references