argument from evil

Do Proponents of the Argument from Evil Try to Have it Both Ways? A Reply to David Wood

(Redated post originally published on 26 October 2011) According to David Wood (see here), atheists who appeal to the argument from evil are logically inconsistent. Why? Wood offers the following explanation: For instance, atheists seem to be arguing (1) that human beings are so good that God shouldn’t allow us to suffer, and (2) that Do Proponents of the Argument from Evil Try to Have it Both Ways? A Reply to David Wood

Paul Draper, the Fallacy of Understated Evidence, Theism, and Naturalism

(Redated post originally published on 23 November 2011) Paul Draper has usefully identified a fallacy of inductive reasoning he calls the “fallacy of understated evidence.” According to Draper, in the context of arguments for theism and against naturalism, proponents of a theistic argument are guilty of this fallacy if they “successfully identify some general fact Paul Draper, the Fallacy of Understated Evidence, Theism, and Naturalism

Weighing Theistic Evidence Against Naturalistic Evidence

In the next-to-last paragraph of his book, C.S. Lewis’ Dangerous Idea: In Defense of the Argument from Reason, Victor Reppert makes a very interesting statement: However, I contend that the arguments from reason do provide some substantial reasons for preferring theism to naturalism. The “problem of reason” is a huge problem for reason, as serious or, I Weighing Theistic Evidence Against Naturalistic Evidence

WLC Denies That Anyone Has Ever Died a Sincere Seeker Without Finding God

Can anyone sincerely lack belief in God? And even if they can, can anyone sincerely lack belief in God for the rest of their lives? Many people, including nontheists but not just nontheists, think the answer to both questions is plainly “yes.” But some (many?) theists, no doubt motivated by beliefs such as divine goodness, Biblical inerrancy, WLC Denies That <I>Anyone</I> Has Ever Died a Sincere Seeker Without Finding God

The Irrelevance of Naturalistic Metaethics to Arguments from Evil Against God’s Existence

Consider the following exchange between Christi, a Christian, and Natty, a naturalist, on the problem of evil. Natty: If God exists, then why is there so much evil and suffering in the world? Christi: Well, if God exists, it’s logically possible that so much of the evil and suffering in the world is due to The Irrelevance of Naturalistic Metaethics to Arguments from Evil Against God’s Existence

Hypocrisy on Moral Arguments, Arguments from Evil, and Logical Inconsistency

Many theists are fond of linking the problem of evil with a moral argument for God’s existence. The idea is that by making an argument from evil against God’s existence, the atheist has supposedly contradicted herself since the the argument from evil presupposes an objective evil and objective evil, in turn, presupposes God’s existence. Since Hypocrisy on Moral Arguments, Arguments from Evil, and Logical Inconsistency