Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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.
In 1955 he published "Evil and Omnipotence", which summarized his view that belief in the existence of evil and an all-powerful, all-knowing and all-good god is "positively irrational". [ 18 ] Mackie's views on this logical problem of evil prompted Alvin Plantinga to respond with the " free-will defense ", which Mackie later responded in his ...
The problem of evil is often given in the form of an inconsistent triad. For example, J. L. Mackie gave the following three propositions: God is omnipotent; God is omnibenevolent; Evil exists; Mackie argued that these propositions were inconsistent, and thus, that at least one of these propositions must be false. Either:
J. L. Mackie; Walter Kaufmann ... described the conflict between divine omnipotence and his creation's person's free will, in traditional terms of good and evil ...
Plantinga's argument is a defense against the logical problem of evil as formulated by the philosopher J. L. Mackie beginning in 1955. [59] [60] 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.
In a 1955 article in the philosophy journal Mind, J. L. Mackie tried to resolve the paradox by distinguishing between first-order omnipotence (unlimited power to act) and second-order omnipotence (unlimited power to determine what powers to act things shall have). [15]
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.
The problem of evil is generally formulated in two forms: the logical problem of evil and the evidential problem of evil. The logical form of the argument tries to show a logical impossibility in the coexistence of a god and evil, [ 2 ] [ 10 ] while the evidential form tries to show that given the evil in the world, it is improbable that there ...