J L MACKIE EVIL AND OMNIPOTENCE PDF

Mackie begins the article by saying that he thinks that all the arguments for God’s “God is omnipotent; God is wholly good; and yet evil exists. (12) If evil and suffering exist, then God is either not omnipotent, not omniscient, .. such as Anthony Flew and J. L. Mackie have argued that an omnipotent God. IV.—EVIL AND OMNIPOTENCE. By J. L. MACKIE. THE traditional arguments for the existence of God have been fairly thoroughly criticised by philosophers.

Author: Vorg Voodook
Country: South Sudan
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Software
Published (Last): 24 September 2013
Pages: 239
PDF File Size: 15.62 Mb
ePub File Size: 20.3 Mb
ISBN: 814-2-46839-648-9
Downloads: 48164
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Goltikree

If there is any blame that needs to go around, it may be that some of it should go to Mackie and other atheologians for claiming that the problem of evil was a problem of inconsistency. If logic were created by God e. God would especially want and try to get rid of them. Plantinga’s Free Will Anc, then, cannot serve as a morally sufficient reason mackei God’s allowing disease and natural disasters. Is a wrong free act not really evil, because the freedom is a value that outweighs is wrongness?

Plantinga claims that when we think through what robust free will really amounts to, we can see that atheologians are unbeknownst to themselves asking God to do the logically impossible. The essential point of the Free Will Defense is that the creation of a world containing moral good is a cooperative venture; it requires the uncoerced concurrence of significantly free creatures. In the end, theodicy would seem to have to argue that this is the best of all possible worlds a difficult task.

The logical problem of evil claims that God’s omnipotence, omniscience and supreme goodness would completely rule out the possibility of evil and that the existence of evil would do the same for the existence of a supreme being. No limits to what an omnipotent thing can do. What about W 2? What reason might be given for this idea? It is difficult to see how a God who allowed bad things to happen just for the heck of it could be worthy of reverence, faith and worship.

  COMPANY LAW MUNISH BHANDARI PDF

Problem of evil puts them in a much worse position. Plantinga claims that if someone is incapable of doing evil, that person cannot have morally significant free will. In response to each of these questions, Plantinga’s answer is “No.

Is W 3 possible? All he needs to do is give a logically consistent description of a way that God and evil can co-exist. These facts reveal that God is, in St. The universe is better with some evil in it than it would be if there were no evil.

Although sketching out mere possibilities without giving them any evidential support is typically an unsatisfactory thing to do in philosophy, it is not clear that Mackie’s unhappiness with Plantinga is completely warranted.

Evil and the Concept of God.

Logical Problem of Evil | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Might one argue that 2 nd order goods far outweigh 2 nd order evils in importance and so this is still the best of all possible worlds? Evil, Omniscience and Omnipotence. Something is dreadfully wrong with our world. Madden, Edward and Peter Hare. This is the “logical problem of evil.

Sign in to use this feature. It was, after all, Mackie himself who characterized the problem of evil as one of logical inconsistency: If God is all-powerful, all-knowing and perfectly good, why does he let so many bad things happen?

  BARTOLOMEO TROMBONCINO PDF

Let’s first consider a down-to-earth example of omnipotejce morally sufficient reason a human being might have before moving on to the case of God.

The atheologian is maintaining that statements 1 through 4 couldn’t possibly all be true at the same time. Don’t have an account?

Other Responses to the Logical Problem of Evil Plantinga’s Free Will Defense has been the mackkie famous theistic response to the logical problem of evil because he did more to clarify the issues surrounding the logical problem than anyone else. This objection leads us to draw a distinction between the following two kinds of evil and suffering: Anderson Woods – – Journal of Philosophy 23 The Evidential Argument from Evil.

Logical Problem of Evil

One point of conflict concerns the possibility of human free will in heaven. None of these challenges undermines the basic point established above that Plantinga’s Free Will Defense successfully rebuts the logical problem of evil.

Maxkie God can make people who freely choose to act well on some occasions, there is nothing logically impossible about him making people who freely choose the good on all occasions. As a perfectly good God, he also feels your pain.

If it is possible that God has a morally sufficient reason for allowing evil and suffering to occur, then the logical problem of evil fails to prove the non-existence of God.