A Defense of the Argument From Evil: A Critique of Pure Theism

Dissertation, Vanderbilt University (1990)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This dissertation alleges to successfully defend the argument from evil and thereby show that belief in an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent god is implausible. The three basic premises of the argument juxtapose the perfect attributes of the traditional Western notion of god to the existence of evil in an attempt to lead to the conclusion that god lacks one or more of the aforementioned attributes. Though some argue that the conclusion is not necessitated by the premises since there is no logical inconsistency in asserting both that god possesses these attributes and that evil exists, it is argued here that a suppressed premise needs to be made explicit for the argument to function properly such that evil can be taken as evidence against the existence of a perfect deity. ;The theist proposes a variety of solutions to the apparent discord engendered by the coexistence of evil and a perfect deity. J. L. Mackie, in criticizing these various theistic proposals, claims that they all are either adequate or fallacious. Adequate solutions are comprised, essentially, of a denial of one of the three original premises of the argument, i.e., that either omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence or evil is not real. The fallacious solutions, of which there are four types generally thought to be exhaustive, are shown to be inadequate for salvaging the traditional Western concept of deity. Familiar themes discussed among the fallacious solutions are: that the world is better with some evil than without; evil is necessary as a contrast to good; evil is necessary to bring about a greater good; evil is necessary for soul-making; evil is the result of free-will. ;Finally, a solution proposed by Clement Dore which does not properly fit into Mackie's schema, the "pollution" solution, so nicknamed because evil is viewed as a waste by-product of the natural functioning of causal laws upon the matter of the universe, is discussed. Four possible interpretations of this solution are offered and each interpretation, in turn, is found to be invalid. In conclusion, evil is shown to be powerful evidence against the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent god

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Logical problem of evil.James R. Beebe - 2003 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Gratuitous Evil and Divine Existence.Keith Yandell - 1989 - Religious Studies 25 (1):15 - 30.
The Argument from Evil: ROBERT J. RICHMAN.Robert J. Richman - 1969 - Religious Studies 4 (2):203-211.
The problem of evil and the attributes of God.James A. Keller - 1989 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 26 (3):155 - 171.
Has Plantinga “buried” Mackie’s logical argument from evil?Anders Kraal - 2014 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 75 (3):189-196.
The Evidential Problem of Evil.Paul Robert Draper - 1985 - Dissertation, University of California, Irvine
Evidential arguments from evil.Richard Otte - 2000 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 48 (1):1-10.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-02-06

Downloads
1 (#1,884,204)

6 months
1 (#1,533,009)

Historical graph of downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Andrea Weisberger
University of North Florida

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references