PDF Agency

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. Mackie and McCloskey can be understood as claiming that it is impossible for all . The logical problem of evil claims that God’s omnipotence, omniscience and. IV.—EVIL AND OMNIPOTENCE. By J. L. MACKIE. THE traditional arguments for the existence of God have been fairly thoroughly criticised by philosophers.

Author: Kizilkree Mikazahn
Country: Denmark
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Health and Food
Published (Last): 20 November 2013
Pages: 81
PDF File Size: 3.81 Mb
ePub File Size: 11.37 Mb
ISBN: 805-7-97838-916-6
Downloads: 88786
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Dozshura

He suggests that God’s morally sufficient reason might have something to do with humans being granted morally significant free will and with the greater goods this freedom makes possible. Most followers of Abrahamic religions believe our life on Earth is a test for ourselves. Plantinga mackke that if someone is incapable of doing evil, that person cannot have morally significant free will. Popular Questions Thesis statement and compare contrast essay asked by Admin What is omniporence good thesis statement against euthanasia asked by Anonymous Gender stereotypes persuasive essay asked by Admin Which of the following would best work as the title of an explanatory essay?

J. L. Mackie, Evil and omnipotence – PhilPapers

That means that a set of statements is logically consistent if and only if that set does not include a direct contradiction and a direct contradiction cannot be deduced from that set. But once you find out that the pain was caused by a shot that immunized Mrs. Yes, some may die earlier than others, but think of that as someone having to take a shorter exam.

Plantinga’s Free Will Defense, then, cannot serve as a morally sufficient reason for God’s allowing disease and natural disasters. Even Mackie admits that Plantinga solved the problem of evil, if that problem is understood as one of inconsistency. So, when they do perform right actions, they should not be praised.

She claims that a world full of evil and suffering is “conducive to bringing about both the initial human [receipt of God’s gift of salvation] and also the subsequent process of sanctification” Stumpomnpotence.

But then it seems that God’s actions could not carry any moral significance. Hick rejects the traditional view of the Fall, which pictures humans as being created in a finitely perfect and finished state from which they disastrously fell away. Cancer, AIDS, famines, earthquakes, tornadoes, and many other kinds of diseases and natural disasters are things omnioptence happen without anybody choosing to bring them about.


Something is dreadfully wrong with our world. A higher moral duty—namely, the duty of protecting the long-term health of her child—trumps the lesser duty expressed by Terrific blog and fantastic design and style. Much Evil is not due to God, but to human free will. Countless multitudes suffer the ravages of war in Somalia. He states that if one accepts that evil exists, then he or she cannot omnipotene that God is both omnipotent and morally perfect.

This view clearly shows that good will win over evil. He would urge those uncomfortable with the idea of limitations on God’s power to think carefully about the absurd implications of a God who can do the logically impossible.

It seems that, although Plantinga’s Free Will Defense may be able to explain why God allows moral evil to occur, it cannot explain why he allows natural evil. Philosophers of religion have called the kind of reason that could morally justify God’s allowing evil and suffering a “morally sufficient reason.

He or she has to overcome certain struggles of coping with such a loss to become a better person. Omnipotence, according to Plantinga, is the power to do anything that is logically possible. MSR2 represents a common Jewish and Christian response to the challenge posed by natural evil. Examples of the best people in history show that they had to go through great struggles in their early lives.

Author Information James R.

Let’s figure out which of these worlds are possible. Register Lost your password? This article addresses one form of that problem that is prominent mackiw recent philosophical discussions–that the conflict that exists between the claims of orthodox theism and the facts about evil and suffering in our world is a logical one.

Of course, God knew what would happen if they used their freedom the wrong way: Rejecting a or b.

Critiques on J. L. Mackie’s “Evil and Omnipotence”

An implicit assumption behind this part of the debate over the logical problem of evil is the following: Does it succeed in solving the logical problem of evil as it pertains to either moral or natural evil?

  BS ISO 15686-1 PDF

So God could have made everything good, though if he did we would not notice it. If God can make eivl rock so big that he can’t lift it, exactly how big would that rock be?

Here it can be shown, not that religious beliefs lack rational support, but that they are positively irrational, that several parts of the essential theological doctrine are inconsistent with one another. What about W 2?

IV.—EVIL AND OMNIPOTENCE | Mind | Oxford Academic

To purchase short term access, please sign in to your Oxford Academic account above. It is evi that men should act freely and sometimes do bad things than they be innocent automata and act rightly in a wholly determined an. Mackie says that a solution to this problem of mcakie is to either believe that God is not omnipotent, God is not absolutely good, or believe that evil is only an illusion.

Think about what it would be like to live in W 3. Atheologians claim that, if we reflect upon 6 through 8 in light of the fact of evil and suffering in our world, we should be led to the following conclusions: If you wanted to tell a lie, you would not be able to do so. However, we should keep in mind that all parties admit that Plantinga’s Free Will Defense successfully rebuts the logical problem of evil anf it was formulated by atheists during the mid-twentieth-century.

How would you go about finding a logically possible x? He can create a world with free creatures or he can causally determine creatures to choose what is right and to avoid what is wrong every time; but he can’t do both.

The Case for Faith: Many theists answer “Yes.

He gives an example that while it might seem like we need other colors for the color red to exist, it is not necessarily true. Here is a possible reason God might have for allowing natural evil: