Moti Mizrahi’s New Paper: “The Problem of Natural Inequality: A New Problem of Evil”
Forthcoming in Philosophia: Philosophical Quarterly of Israel. Pre-publication copy available here. Abstract. In this paper, I argue that there is a kind of evil, namely, the unequal distribution of natural endowments, or natural inequality, which presents theists with a new evidential (not logical or incompatibility) problem of evil. The problem of natural inequality is a … Moti Mizrahi’s New Paper: “The Problem of Natural Inequality: A New Problem of Evil”
Christianity Today asks, “Are Birth Defects Part of God’s Plan?”
LINK If Christianity is true, then, of course, the answer has to be, “Yes.” But is it true? The philosophically significant question, however, is this: “Does naturalism or theism, including Christian theism, provide the best explanation for birth defects?” Here is an excellent by Paul Draper, taken from a lecture he recently gave at the … <I>Christianity Today</I> asks, “Are Birth Defects Part of God’s Plan?”
Skeptical Atheism and the Fine-Tuning Argument?
The multiple universes objection is a common objection to fine-tuning arguments for God’s existence. Paul Draper once wrote an interesting essay comparing that objection to that argument to the same objection applied to arguments from evil. What I’ve often wondered is this: what if we tried to draw another parallel between fine-tuning arguments and arguments … Skeptical Atheism and the Fine-Tuning Argument?
Thoughts on the “Logical vs. Evidential” Distinction
Chris Hallquist recently questioned the significance of the distinction between logical arguments from evil and evidential arguments from evil. He writes: In general, the insistence of people who follow these issues on classifying versions of the problem of evil as either “logical” or “evidential” is weird. It isn’t something you see with any other kind … Thoughts on the “Logical vs. Evidential” Distinction
The Loftus-Torley Exchange
It seems to me that Torley clearly has the upper hand in this exchange so far. As a debate judge, I would “flow” the entire “debate” to Torley up to this point. But that doesn’t mean game over for Loftus, however. In each case, I think Loftus has strong replies available. Here are my brief … The Loftus-Torley Exchange
Recent Paper on Skeptical Theism and the Evidential Argument from Evil
I just discovered this. Justin P. McBrayer, “CORNEA and Inductive Evidence,” Faith and Philosophy 26 (2009): 77-86 Abstract: One of the primary tools in the theist’s defense against “noseeum” arguments from evil is an epistemic principle concerning the Conditions Of ReasoNable Epistemic Access (CORNEA) which places an important restriction on what counts as evidence. However, … Recent Paper on Skeptical Theism and the Evidential Argument from Evil
Paul Draper’s Essay, “Darwin’s Argument from Evil”
The entire chapter is available for free courtesy of Google Books. You may need to be logged into a Google account in order to view this. LINK Your name Your email Subject Your message (optional)
William Lane Craig: “Animals aren’t aware that they’re in pain”
Recently, some theists have attempted to deal with that part of the problem of evil generated by horrendous animal suffering found in nature – including hundreds of millions of years of animal suffering before we humans even showed up – by saying that animals aren’t aware that they are in pain. They maintain this is … William Lane Craig: “Animals aren’t aware that they’re in pain”
Paul Draper’s Review of Goetz and Taliaferro’s Naturalism
There are many gems in this review; here is one. To begin with, the alleged advantage that metaphysical theists have because they attribute necessary existence to God is not real, since there is no more reason to believe that a concrete non-natural divine person can exist necessarily than there is to think that nature can … Paul Draper’s Review of Goetz and Taliaferro’s Naturalism
Index: The Evidential Argument from Evil: the Biological Role of Pain and Pleasure
The purpose of this post is to provide an index for all posts regarding Paul Draper’s version of the evidential argument from evil which focuses on the biological role of pain and pleasure (APP).“The Argument from the Biological Role of Pain and Pleasure“: an introduction to the argument“Silver’s Defense of Draper’s Argument from the Biological … Index: The Evidential Argument from Evil: the Biological Role of Pain and Pleasure