Evolutionary Theodicy and the Type-Token Distinction: A Reply to Eikrem and Søvik

Neue Zeitschrift für Systematicsche Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 64 (2):195-206 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

SummaryHow can the immense amount of suffering and waste inherent in the evolutionary process be reconciled with the existence of a perfectly good and omnipotent God? A widely embraced proposal in the area of “evolutionary theodicy” is the so-called “Only Way”-argument. This argument contends that certain valuable goods – in particular, creaturely independence and human freedom – can only come about through a genuinely indeterministic and partly uncontrolled process of evolution. In a previous article, I have argued that the “Only Way”-argument can be defeated by a “Twin Earth”-thought experiment: If God is omnipotent, he could have created – directly, without evolution – creatures that are molecule-for-molecule identical to those that he actually created through evolution. If the creatures that he actually created have freedom and independence, there is no valid reason to deny that the non-evolved “twin creatures” would also be free and independent. Recently, Eikrem and Søvik have suggested a way of blocking my Twin Earth-argument by appealing to the distinction between type-values and token-values. While ES admit that the Twin Earth-argument shows the non-necessity of evolution for the existence of certain type-goods, they argue that an evolutionary creation can be justified by appeal to valuable token-goods that could not have existed without evolution. In this article, I respond to ES’s token-goods argument by showing that it is incompatible with a basic presupposition of “Only Way” evolutionary theodicies, namely the claim that the evolutionary process is genuinely indeterministic and partly uncontrolled.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,628

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

Evolutionary theodicies – an attempt to overcome some impasses.Asle Eikrem & Atle Ottesen Søvik - 2018 - Neue Zeitschrift für Systematicsche Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 60 (3):428-434.
Slurs and the Type-Token Distinction of Their Derogatory Force.Chang Liu - 2019 - Rivista Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio 13 (2):63-72.
Types and tokens.Linda Wetzel - 2008 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
What is token physicalism?Noa Latham - 2003 - Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 84 (3):270-290.
On Types and Words.Linda Wetzel - 2002 - Journal of Philosophical Research 27:239-265.
In Defence of a Type-Token View. Response to Morris.Ivo Dragoun - 2012 - Organon F: Medzinárodný Časopis Pre Analytickú Filozofiu 19 (4):444-458.
Functionalism and token physicalism.Terence Horgan - 1984 - Synthese 59 (June):321-38.
Token-Reflexivity.Ori Simchen - 2013 - Journal of Philosophy 110 (4):173-193.
First Person Thoughts: Shareability and Symmetry.José Luis Bermúdez - 2019 - Grazer Philosophische Studien 96 (4):629-638.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-08-16

Downloads
27 (#586,219)

6 months
21 (#125,057)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Van Gogh’s Painting and an Incestuous Universe.Atle Ottesen Søvik & Asle Eikrem - 2023 - Neue Zeitschrift für Systematicsche Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 65 (1):34-43.
Promising Paths and Dead Ends in Evolutionary Theodicy.Mats Wahlberg - 2023 - Neue Zeitschrift für Systematicsche Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 65 (1):44-54.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references