When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Inconsistent triad - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inconsistent_triad

    An inconsistent triad consists of three propositions of which at most two can be true. For example: Alice loves me. Alice sends flowers to people she loves. Alice has not sent me flowers. If one finds oneself believing all three propositions of an inconsistent triad, then (in order to be rational) one must give up or modify at least one of ...

  3. J. L. Mackie - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._L._Mackie

    John Leslie Mackie FBA (25 August 1917 – 12 December 1981) was an Australian philosopher. He made significant contributions to ethics, the philosophy of religion, metaphysics, and the philosophy of language. Mackie had influential views on metaethics, including his defence of moral scepticism and his sophisticated defence of atheism. He wrote ...

  4. Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics:_Inventing_Right...

    The first chapter, "The Subjectivity of Values," opens with Mackie's rejection of moral universalism: "There are no objective values." [1] This chapter is well known for advancing two arguments against moral universalism: the argument from disagreement and the argument from queerness.

  5. Alvin Plantinga's free-will defense - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvin_Plantinga's_free-will...

    Plantinga's argument is a defense against the logical problem of evil as formulated by the philosopher J. L. Mackie beginning in 1955. [2] [3] Mackie's formulation of the logical problem of evil argued that three attributes ascribed to God (omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence) are logically incompatible with the existence of evil.

  6. Problem of evil - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_evil

    In Arguing About Gods, Graham Oppy offers a dissent; while he acknowledges that "[m]any philosophers seem to suppose that [Plantinga's free-will defense] utterly demolishes the kinds of 'logical' arguments from evil developed by Mackie", he also says "I am not sure this is a correct assessment of the current state of play". [124]

  7. Omnipotence paradox - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omnipotence_paradox

    An omnipotent being with both first and second-order omnipotence at a particular time might restrict its own power to act and, henceforth, cease to be omnipotent in either sense. There has been considerable philosophical dispute since Mackie, as to the best way to formulate the paradox of omnipotence in formal logic. [16] God and logic

  8. Talk:Inconsistent triad - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Inconsistent_triad

    The article should perhaps mention that J. L. Mackie's triad (concerning the problem of evil) goes back at least to Epicurus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.126.207.212 02:31, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

  9. Argument from poor design - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_poor_design

    The argument from poor design, also known as the dysteleological argument, is an argument against the assumption of the existence of a creator God, based on the reasoning that any omnipotent and omnibenevolent deity or deities would not create organisms with the perceived suboptimal designs that occur in nature.