The Problem of Evil and Replies to Some Important Responses
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v10i3.2590Abstract
I begin by distinguishing four different versions of the argument from evil that start from four different moral premises that in various ways link the existence of God to the absence of suffering. The version of the argument from evil that I defend starts from the premise that if God exists, he would not allow excessive, unnecessary suffering. The argument continues by denying the consequent of this conditional to conclude that God does not exist. I defend the argument against Skeptical Theists who say we are in no position to judge that there is excessive, unnecessary suffering by arguing that this defense has absurd consequences. It allows Young Earthers to construct a parallel argument that concludes that we are in no position to judge that God did not create the earth recently. In the last section I consider whether theists can turn the argument from evil on its head by arguing that God exists. I first criticize Alvin Plantinga’s theory of warrant that one might try to use to argue for God’s existence. I then criticize Richard Swinburne’s Bayesian argument to the same conclusion. I conclude that my version of the argument from evil is a strong argument against the existence of God and that several important responses to it do not defeat it.
References
Bergmann, Michael. 2014. “Skeptical Theism, Atheism, and Total Evidence Skepticism”. In Skeptical Theism: New Essays, edited by Trent Dougherty and Justin P. McBrayer, 209–20. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
BonJour, Laurence. 1985. The Structure of Empirical Knowledge. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press.
Cowan, Steve, ed. 2019 [forthcoming]. Problems in Philosophy: An Introduction to the Major Debates on Knowledge, Reality, Values and Government. London: Bloomsbury.
Dougherty, Trent, and Justin P. McBrayer, eds. 2014. Skeptical Theism: New Essays. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
Feldman, Fred. 1978. Introductory ethics. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Fischer, John M., and Neal A. Tognazzini. 2007. “Exploring Evil and Philosophical Failure: A Critical Notice of Peter van Inwagen’s The Problem of Evil”. Faith and Philosophy 24, no. 4: 458–74. doi:10.5840/faithphil20072445.
Ghijsen, Harmen. 2016. “Norman and Truetemp Revisited Reliabilistically: A Proper Functionalist Defeat Account of Clairvoyance”. Episteme 13, no. 1: 89–110. doi:10.1017/epi.2015.55.
Howard-Snyder, Daniel, ed. 1996. The Evidential Argument from Evil. Bloomington: Indiana Univ. Press.
Kvanvig, Jonathan L., ed. 1996. Warrant in Contemporary Epistemology: Essays in honor of Plantinga’s Theory of knowledge. Translated by Alvin Plantinga. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield.
Lehrer, Keith. 1990. Theory of Knowledge. Boulder: Westview Press.
—. 1996. “Proper Function vs. Systematic Coherence”. In Warrant in Contemporary Epistemology: Essays in Honor of Plantinga’s Theory of Knowledge, edited by Jonathan L. Kvanvig. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield.
Lipton, Peter. 2004. Inference to the Best Explanation. London, New York: Routledge.
Moon, Andrew. 2018. “How to Use Cognitive Faculties You Never Knew You Had”. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 99, no. 6: 251–75. doi:10.1111/papq.12234.
Perrine, Timothy, and Stephen J. Wykstra. 2014. “Skeptical Theism, Abductive Atheology, and Theory Versioning”. In Skeptical Theism: New Essays, edited by Trent Dougherty and Justin P. McBrayer, 142–63. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
Plantinga, Alvin. 1993. Warrant and Proper Function. New York: Oxford University Press.
—. 1996. “Respondeo”. In Warrant in Contemporary Epistemology: Essays in honor of Plantinga’s Theory of knowledge, edited by Jonathan L. Kvanvig. Lanham, Md: Rowman & Littlefield.
Russell, Bruce. 1989. “The Persistent Problem of Evil”. Faith and Philosophy 6, no. 2. doi:10.5840/faithphil19896221.
—. 1996. “Defenseless”. In The Evidential Argument from Evil, edited by Daniel Howard-Snyder, 193–205. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
—. 2000. “Review of Providence and the Problem of Evil”. Philosophical Books 41, no. 3: 224–25.
—. 2004. “The Problem of Evil: Why Is There So Much Suffering?”. In Introduction to Philosophy: Classical and Contemporary Readings, edited by Louis P. Pojman, 207–13. New York: Oxford Univ. Press.
—. 2017. “Excessive Unnecessary Suffering”. In Ethics and the Problem of Evil, edited by James P. Sterba, 90–107. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Univ. Press.
—. 2019 [forthcoming]. “God Does not Exist” and “Response to Rasmussen”. In Problems in Philosophy: An Introduction to the Major Debates on Knowledge, Reality, Values and Government, edited by Steve Cowan. London: Bloomsbury.
—. 2019 [forthcoming]. “The Problem of Evil”. In Theism and Atheism: Opposing Viewpoints in Philosophy. Farmington Hills, MI: Cenage Learning.
Sterba, James P., ed. 2017. Ethics and the Problem of Evil. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Univ. Press.
Swinburne, Richard. 1998. Providence and the Problem of Evil. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
—. 2004. The Existence of God. Oxford, New York: Clarendon Press;.
van Inwagen, Peter. 1996. “Reflections on the Chapters by Draper, Russell, and Gale”. In The Evidential Argument from Evil, edited by Daniel Howard-Snyder, 219–43. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Univ. Press.
—. 2006. The Problem of Evil: The Gifford Lectures 2003. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.
Wykstra, Stephen J. 1984. “The Humean Obstacle to Evidential Arguments from Suffering: On Avoiding the Evils of “Appearance””. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 16, no. 2: 73–93. doi:10.1007/BF00136567.
—. 1996. “Rowe’s Noseeum Arguments from Evil”. In The Evidential Argument from Evil, edited by Daniel Howard-Snyder, 126–50. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Univ.Press.
—. 2017. “Beyond the Impasse: Contemporary Moral Theory and the Crisis of Skeptical Theism”. In Ethics and the Problem of Evil, edited by James P. Sterba, 108–40. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Univ. Press.
