Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

To support me on Patreon (thank you): http://www.patreon.com/cosmicskeptic To donate to my PayPal (thank you): http://www.paypal.me/cosmicskeptic To purchase Cosmic Skeptic merchandise: https://cosmicskeptic.teemill.com/ --------------------------VIDEO NOTES-------------------------- The problem of evil is one of the most difficult challenges facing a theist who wishes to defend the existence of a good god. In this episode of the Cosmic Skeptic Podcast, Alex is joined by Joe Schmid, an agnostic, Cameron Bertuzzi, a protestant, and Trent Horn, a catholic, to discuss the problem in detail, and analyse various responses to it. --------------------------------LINKS--------------------------------- Cameron Bertuzzi: https://www.youtube.com/c/CapturingChristianity Trent Horn: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheCounselofTrent Joe Schmid: https://www.youtube.com/c/MajestyofReason - Cameron’s discussion with Philip Goff: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZZp_Q3If7o My debate with Trent on God's existence: https://youtu.be/5PF1JgXOKDQ My video on Stephen Law's evil god challenge: https://youtu.be/xLnsY5io964 Trent's debate with Matt Dillahunty on the Resurrection: https://youtu.be/7V6UNSvHVDM Better Never To Have Been, by David Benatar: https://amzn.to/3NFsPOa -------------------------TIMESTAMPS--------------------------- 0:00 Intro 1:16 Is God's Power Limited? 16:15 Evidential vs Logical Problem of Evil 25:53 The Problem of Animal Suffering 42:23 Skeptical Theism 50:22 Does God Have to be Good? 56:23 Higher Order Goods and The Experience Machine 1:04:20 Comparing Theodicies with Antinatalism 1:10:38 Closing Thoughts ----------------------SPECIAL THANKS------------------------ As always, I would like to direct extra gratitude to my top-tier patrons: Itamar Lev Evan Allen Faraz Harsini John Early Sveline Teymour Beydoun Adam Gray Nolan Kent Seth Balodi Citizens of Civilization James Davis g8speedy -----------------------------CONNECT------------------------------ My Website/Blog: http://www.cosmicskeptic.com SOCIAL LINKS: Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/cosmicskeptic Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cosmicskeptic Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/cosmicskeptic Snapchat: cosmicskeptic The Cosmic Skeptic Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-cosmic-skeptic-podcast/id1458675168 ----------------------------CONTACT------------------------------- Business email: [email protected] Or send me something: Alex O'Connor Po Box 1610 OXFORD OX4 9LL ENGLAND ------------------------------------------------------------------------

To support me on Patreon (thank you): http://www.patreon.com/cosmicskeptic To donate to my PayPal (thank you): http://www.paypal.me/cosmicskeptic To purchase Cosmic Skeptic merchandise: https://cosmicskeptic.teemill.com/ --------------------------VIDEO NOTES-------------------------- The problem of evil is one of the most difficult challenges facing a theist who wishes to defend the existence of a good god. In this episode of the Cosmic Skeptic Podcast, Alex is joined by Joe Schmid, an agnostic, Cameron Bertuzzi, a protestant, and Trent Horn, a catholic, to discuss the problem in detail, and analyse various responses to it. --------------------------------LINKS--------------------------------- Cameron Bertuzzi: https://www.youtube.com/c/CapturingChristianity Trent Horn: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheCounselofTrent Joe Schmid: https://www.youtube.com/c/MajestyofReason - Cameron’s discussion with Philip Goff: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZZp_Q3If7o My debate with Trent on God's existence: https://youtu.be/5PF1JgXOKDQ My video on Stephen Law's evil god challenge: https://youtu.be/xLnsY5io964 Trent's debate with Matt Dillahunty on the Resurrection: https://youtu.be/7V6UNSvHVDM Better Never To Have Been, by David Benatar: https://amzn.to/3NFsPOa -------------------------TIMESTAMPS--------------------------- 0:00 Intro 1:16 Is God's Power Limited? 16:15 Evidential vs Logical Problem of Evil 25:53 The Problem of Animal Suffering 42:23 Skeptical Theism 50:22 Does God Have to be Good? 56:23 Higher Order Goods and The Experience Machine 1:04:20 Comparing Theodicies with Antinatalism 1:10:38 Closing Thoughts ----------------------SPECIAL THANKS------------------------ As always, I would like to direct extra gratitude to my top-tier patrons: Itamar Lev Evan Allen Faraz Harsini John Early Sveline Teymour Beydoun Adam Gray Nolan Kent Seth Balodi Citizens of Civilization James Davis g8speedy -----------------------------CONNECT------------------------------ My Website/Blog: http://www.cosmicskeptic.com SOCIAL LINKS: Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/cosmicskeptic Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cosmicskeptic Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/cosmicskeptic Snapchat: cosmicskeptic The Cosmic Skeptic Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-cosmic-skeptic-podcast/id1458675168 ----------------------------CONTACT------------------------------- Business email: [email protected] Or send me something: Alex O'Connor Po Box 1610 OXFORD OX4 9LL ENGLAND ------------------------------------------------------------------------

This paper is in the public domain in USA. Metadata comes from the CrossRef API, see full record in the source URL below.

Can a good God allow evil? This episode has guest teacher Dr Wallace Marshall and addresses how Christians can engage on this important and often cited argument against the existence of God.

\"And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away\" (Revelation 21:4, NKJV).

2 Corinthians 4:7-18

www.thetheologypit.com

www.thetheologypit.com

The Existence of God and the Problem of Evil w/ Pat Flynn and John DeRosa Pat Flynn (Philosophy for the People) and John DeRosa (Classical Theism Podcast) discuss the existence of God in light of the problem of evil and then offer some theological solutions to how God can exist and yet allow evil in the world. Writer, entrepreneur, and “re-converted” Catholic, Pat Flynn focuses his efforts on helping others find happiness and wholeness through fitness, philosophy, and religion. He is the author of four books and host of the podcast The Pat Flynn Show, where he teaches listeners about Generalism, that is being good to great at many things, rather than the best at just one, and combining those talents in a unique stack to better themselves and the world. Pat can be found at https://www.philosophyforthepeople.com/ John DeRosa teaches high school mathematics in New Jersey and studies philosophy and religion on the side. He completed his undergraduate degree in Math Education at The College of New Jersey and a master’s degree in mathematics at Montclair State University. He is a Catholic Christian and belongs to Our Lady of the Lake Parish in Verona, NJ. He acknowledges Jesus Christ as Lord, King, and Savior, and desires to please Him with all that he does. John’s website, blog, and podcast (found at Classical Theism) are a labor of love. John deeply enjoys learning about faith, religion, and philosophy. Nonetheless, his true love is his wonderful wife Christine, who he married on April 22, 2017. She provides constant support and encouragement. John can be found at: https://www.classicaltheism.com/episodes/ 00:00:00 - Introductions 00:01:58 - 2 VERY Important Distinctions 00:05:55 - The Metaphysical Problem of Evil 00:07:40 - Theodicy vs. Defense 00:12:58 - Four Major Problems of Evil 00:19:13 - Theistic Responses to the Problem 00:28:45 - Skeptical Theism? 00:38:06 - Reformed Epistemology 00:40:45 - God is not a moral agent? 00:52:05 - Evil/suffering aren’t likely on naturalism 01:12:30 - Closing thoughts _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Are you tired of all the confusion in the Catholic Church? So was I! For this reason, I decided to intensely study the Catholic Magisterium in order to discern between what people say about the Catholic Church vs. what it actually says and teaches. If you are a confused Catholic, or are discerning becoming a Catholic, Reason & Theology offers you an in-depth examination of the situation in the Catholic Church that will help make sense of the confusion. Additionally, my new free eBook Church Chaos will provide you with Biblical insights for how to navigate in such confusing times. Visit reasonandtheology.com to download your free copy today! 🔴PLEASE HELP THIS CHANNEL GROW🔴 🔴SUPPORT Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9Z-xXb0tzX2FSCSDEnNJ8w Become a patron on Patreon https://www.patreon.com/reasonandtheology Become an R&T YouTube member: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9Z-xXb0tzX2FSCSDEnNJ8w/join Donate: https://www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=WV79VFBBXCEBE 🔴VISIT Website: ReasonAndTheology.com for more information about R&T Website: MaximusInstitute.com for more information about the Maximus Institute Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/reasonandtheology Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/michaelloftonRT Discord: https://discord.gg/TsX4PRP Twitter: https://twitter.com/michaelloftonRT Telegram: https://t.me/reasonandtheologychat Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/reasonandtheology/ Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/reasonandtheology LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/michaellofton84 🔴LISTEN Itunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/reason-and-theology-show-reason-and-theology/id1459297783 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/show/michael-lofton Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1ayL3WLYcBqRvqsOkfNz4E RSS Feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/ReasonAndTheologyShow 🔴VERBUM DISCOUNT As a fan of R&T, you can get 5 free books and 10% off packages if you use the following link: https://verbum.com/reason

On Being a Pagan Chapter Twenty Four - The Coincidence of Opposites and the Problem of Evil Alain de Benoist Translated by Jon Graham Edited by Greg Johnson 2004 Originally published in French under the title Comment peut-on étre paien? under the pen name Albin Michel, 1981 https://archive.org/details/onbeingpagan0000beno Intro by @CounterRevAudio Intro Music: 'I Walk With Ghosts' by Scott Buckley - released under CC-BY 4.0. www.scottbuckley.com.au Got ideas for narration on my channel? Let me know by dropping the details on this form: https://forms.gle/5FtzNUMyavr5RcRHA https://unpopular.academy/ https://findmyfrens.net/ Support me: https://www.subscribestar.com/skepticalwaves https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsKCjS-yjHnW5IlOymZNVzA/join Or with BTC: bc1qswsnttlxumftk78r2qkx7ahn3f8ts3qhqkedmd

The Problem of Evil with Pat Flynn and Dr. Gaven Kerr Dr. Gaven Kerr, OP and Pat Flynn (Word on Fire Ministries) discuss the problem of evil from a Catholic perspective, with an emphasis on the Thomistic perspective. ___________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer: Any view expressed by a host, contributor or guest is not necessarily reflective of the views of other hosts, contributors or guests. 🔴PLEASE HELP THIS CHANNEL GROW🔴 Disclaimer: Any view expressed by a host, contributor or guest is not necessarily reflective of the views of other hosts, contributors or guests. 🔴SUPPORT Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9Z-xXb0tzX2FSCSDEnNJ8w Become a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/reasonandtheology Donate: https://reasonandtheology.com/donate/ 🔴VISIT Website: ReasonAndTheology.com for more information Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/reasonandtheology Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/michaelloftonRT Discord: https://discord.gg/TsX4PRP Twitter: https://twitter.com/michaelloftonRT 🔴LISTEN Itunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/reason-and-theology-show-reason-and-theology/id1459297783 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/show/michael-lofton 🔴READ Is My Baby In Hell by Michael Lofton: Hope for Parents of Unbaptized Infants: https://www.amazon.com/My-Baby-Hell-Parents-Unbaptized/dp/B085HMV42F/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=is+my+baby+in+hell&qid=1608663858&sr=8-1

No Description

Message from Paul Morgun on July 3, 2022

Many around the world labeled the events of September 11 as \"evil.\" President Bush in his recent State of the Union speech described \"an axis of evil.\" But what does the word mean? It is a subject of enduring theological debate, even of scientific argument. It drives to the heart of the question: What does it mean to be human?

Fr. Bart Stevens

Fr. Bart Stevens

Fr. Bart Stevens

Atheists often respond to the cosmic fine-tuning argument by appealing to the multiverse. If our universe is one of a vast (possibly infinite) array of universes, perhaps a life-permitting universe isn't so improbable after all. But if atheists can appeal to the multiverse to answer cosmic fine-tuning, can't theists appeal to the multiverse to answer the problem of evil? William Lane Craig's Reasonable Faith animated video on the fine-tuning of the universe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE76nwimuT0 #Multiverse #ProblemOfEvil #DavidWood Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpSU0uqo6Dg Uploader: Acts17Apologetics

Atheists often respond to the cosmic fine-tuning argument by appealing to the multiverse. If our universe is one of a vast (possibly infinite) array of universes, perhaps a life-permitting universe isn't so improbable after all. But if atheists can appeal to the multiverse to answer cosmic fine-tuning, can't theists appeal to the multiverse to answer the problem of evil? William Lane Craig's Reasonable Faith animated video on the fine-tuning of the universe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EE76nwimuT0 #Multiverse #ProblemOfEvil #DavidWood Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JpSU0uqo6Dg Uploader: Acts17Apologetics

26 p

26 p

Father Ryan Erlenbush

Hays Mill 20150825kv Hays Mill Church of Christ

Includes bibliographical references

Randy Jamison on The Problem of Evil - Part 6

Worship service and message at the Medford First Church of the Nazarene

Worship service and message at the Medford First Church of the Nazarene

Randy Jamison on The Problem of Evil Part 1 - Introduction -- God has a morally good reason for evil!

The Problem of Evil Part 3 - Goodness of God -- Ps119:68 Thou art good and doest good!

Randy Jamison on The Problem of Evil - Part 4 -- Free will of man - God's secret will, God's preceptive will God's will of disposition - Man's free will, libertarian vs compatible.

Randy Jamison on The Problem of Evil - Part 4 -- Free will of man - God's secret will, God's preceptive will God's will of disposition - Man's free will, libertarian vs compatible.

Randy Jamison on The Problem of Evil - Part 4 -- Free will of man - God's secret will, God's preceptive will God's will of disposition - Man's free will, libertarian vs compatible.

There is no greater challenge to belief in the existence of an all-powerful benevolent God than the Problem of Evil. Mackie expounds upon the problem of evil in a profound and rational manner. Classic!

There is no greater challenge to belief in the existence of an all-powerful benevolent God than the Problem of Evil. Mackie expounds upon the problem of evil in a profound and rational manner. Classic!

Christianity and the Problem of Evil in the World Full video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQZjtiJ-duc&ab_channel=Reason%26Theology #philosophy #theism #atheistm #agnosticism _________________________________________________________________________ Disclaimer: Any view expressed by a host, contributor or guest is not necessarily reflective of the views of other hosts, contributors or guests. 🔴PLEASE HELP THIS CHANNEL GROW🔴 🔴SUPPORT Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9Z-xXb0tzX2FSCSDEnNJ8w Become a patron on Patreon https://www.patreon.com/reasonandtheology Become an R&T YouTube member: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9Z-xXb0tzX2FSCSDEnNJ8w/join Donate: https://reasonandtheology.com/donate/ 🔴VISIT Website: ReasonAndTheology.com for more information about R&T Website: MaximusInstitute.com for more information about the Maximus Institute Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/reasonandtheology Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/michaelloftonRT Discord: https://discord.gg/TsX4PRP Twitter: https://twitter.com/michaelloftonRT Telegram: https://t.me/reasonandtheologychat Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/reasonandtheology/ Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/reasonandtheology LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/michaellofton84 🔴LISTEN Itunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/reason-and-theology-show-reason-and-theology/id1459297783 Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/show/michael-lofton Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1ayL3WLYcBqRvqsOkfNz4E RSS Feed: http://feeds.feedburner.com/ReasonAndTheologyShow 🔴VERBUM DISCOUNT As a fan of R&T, you can get 5 free books and 10% off packages if you use the following link: https://verbum.com/reason

Bibliography: p. 113-114

http://alhassanain.org/english/?com=book&id=752

Randy Jamison on the Problem of Evil - Part 2

Muslim And Exmuslim Discuss The Problem Of Evil

According to the logical problem of evil, the existence of an all-good, all-powerful, and all-knowing God (hereafter the traditional conception of God) is logically incompatible with the existence of evil. By the middle of the 20th century, however—thanks by and large to the work of figures like Alvin Plantinga—it became widely agreed that there is no logical incompatibility between such a God and the existence of evil. In response, proponents of the problem of evil changed tack—instead of arguing that the existence of evil is logically incompatible with the traditional conception of God, they argue for the much weaker thesis that the existence of evil (or of certain types, degrees, or amounts of evil) makes the existence of such a God unlikely, or that the existence of evil poses at least an evidential challenge to theism. Call this the evidential problem of evil. That said, however, given that several of the factors needed to establish the conclusion of the evidential problem of evil—for instance, the full set of reasons an omniscient God might know for allowing evil—are beyond human knowledge (as skeptical theists have been quick to point out), the evidential problem of evil might seem to rest on intuitions regarding the kind/amount of evil in the world, the likelihood that God exists given the existence of evil, etc. In recent years, experimental philosophy has powerfully called into question the theoretical import of any philosophical intuitions that are not shared across various demographics—cultural, ethnic, socioeconomic, etc. Philosophers, so the story goes, once assumed that intuitions were more or less universal and aptly theory-guiding. But through empirical research, experimental philosophers have argued that perhaps many of our philosophical intuitions are not nearly as universal as many philosophers might have hoped—potentially undermining the theoretical import of such intuitions. In his article, “The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism” (1979), William Rowe puts forward the following argument: 1. There exists instances of intense suffering which an omnipotent, omniscient being could have prevented without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse. 2. An omniscient, wholly good being would prevent the occurrence of any intense suffering it could, unless it could not do so without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse. 3. [Therefore,] there does not exist an omnipotent, omniscient, wholly good being. (1979, 336) Of course, given that such an argument is valid, if the premises are true then the conclusion must be true. Rowe takes premise 2 to be fairly uncontroversial. In support of premise 1, however, Rowe presents a vignette where a fawn is caught in a forest fire, suffers horribly, and eventually dies. Insofar as we have the intuition that the fawn’s suffering in this vignette is pointless (i.e. not serving to prevent a greater or equal evil or promote a greater good)—and insofar as we think our inability to see such a “point” counts as evidence for thinking that there is no point—then that counts as evidence against theism (given the argument above). In keeping with the research methods of experimental philosophy, research that was conducted as a part of the “Problem of Evil and Experimental Philosophy of Religion” project explored how widespread Rowe’s intuitions are and what psychological mechanisms might underwrite them. In particular, we explored the following hypotheses: 1. The Shared Hypothesis: Rowe’s guiding intuition--that the death of the fawn seems pointless--will not be shared across a wide range of demographics. This can be tested simply by collecting demographic information on everyone in the control group. 2. The Influence Hypothesis: Manipulating the context-level of Rowe’s original vignette will have a significant effect on the participant's level of agreement with Rowe’s conclusion that the suffering is senseless and no greater evil is prevented and no greater good is accomplished. Specifically, it is hypothesized that if participants are given more information regarding when and why forest fires occur (high context) they will show less agreement with Rowe in comparison to the control group. 3. The Conflicting Intuitions Hypothesis: A significant proportion (>20%) of people who share Rowe’s guiding intuition will have conflicting intuitions regarding the problem of evil. In other words, many people who report that their inability to see a point to the target suffering counts as strong evidence in favor of thinking that there is no point to that suffering will also report that if there was a point to the target suffering they would be very unlikely to be aware of it. And to summarize our findings, we found (i) that the target intuition at work in Rowe’s argument is not shared across various demographics (including education level, gender, ethnicity, nationality, and religion); (ii) the inclusion of context greatly diminished participants’ reported perception of pointlessness; and (iii) a significant portion of the population did indeed have conflicting intuitions regarding the problem of evil. For more information on our original findings, see here: https://philpapers.org/rec/MCAECT These initial results were extremely exploratory; however, they raised many questions that we wanted to explore further in subsequent research. In particular, in our follow-up research we’d like to further explore: - alternative indexes for measuring agreement with Rowe; - whether our initial results will replicate; - why context seems to have the impact on the perception of pointlessness that our initial results suggest; - whether specific personality measures can account for some of the intuition variation found in our original research.

According to the logical problem of evil, the existence of an all-good, all-powerful, and all-knowing God (hereafter the traditional conception of God) is logically incompatible with the existence of evil. By the middle of the 20th century, however—thanks by and large to the work of figures like Alvin Plantinga—it became widely agreed that there is no logical incompatibility between such a God and the existence of evil. In response, proponents of the problem of evil changed tack—instead of arguing that the existence of evil is logically incompatible with the traditional conception of God, they argue for the much weaker thesis that the existence of evil (or of certain types, degrees, or amounts of evil) makes the existence of such a God unlikely, or that the existence of evil poses at least an evidential challenge to theism. Call this the evidential problem of evil. That said, however, given that several of the factors needed to establish the conclusion of the evidential problem of evil—for instance, the full set of reasons an omniscient God might know for allowing evil—are beyond human knowledge (as skeptical theists have been quick to point out), the evidential problem of evil might seem to rest on intuitions regarding the kind/amount of evil in the world, the likelihood that God exists given the existence of evil, etc. In recent years, experimental philosophy has powerfully called into question the theoretical import of any philosophical intuitions that are not shared across various demographics—cultural, ethnic, socioeconomic, etc. Philosophers, so the story goes, once assumed that intuitions were more or less universal and aptly theory-guiding. But through empirical research, experimental philosophers have argued that perhaps many of our philosophical intuitions are not nearly as universal as many philosophers might have hoped—potentially undermining the theoretical import of such intuitions. In his article, “The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism” (1979), William Rowe puts forward the following argument: 1. There exists instances of intense suffering which an omnipotent, omniscient being could have prevented without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse. 2. An omniscient, wholly good being would prevent the occurrence of any intense suffering it could, unless it could not do so without thereby losing some greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse. 3. [Therefore,] there does not exist an omnipotent, omniscient, wholly good being. (1979, 336) Of course, given that such an argument is valid, if the premises are true then the conclusion must be true. Rowe takes premise 2 to be fairly uncontroversial. In support of premise 1, however, Rowe presents a vignette where a fawn is caught in a forest fire, suffers horribly, and eventually dies. Insofar as we have the intuition that the fawn’s suffering in this vignette is pointless (i.e. not serving to prevent a greater or equal evil or promote a greater good)—and insofar as we think our inability to see such a “point” counts as evidence for thinking that there is no point—then that counts as evidence against theism (given the argument above). In keeping with the research methods of experimental philosophy, research that was conducted as a part of the “Problem of Evil and Experimental Philosophy of Religion” project explored how widespread Rowe’s intuitions are and what psychological mechanisms might underwrite them. In particular, we explored the following hypotheses: 1. The Shared Hypothesis: Rowe’s guiding intuition--that the death of the fawn seems pointless--will not be shared across a wide range of demographics. This can be tested simply by collecting demographic information on everyone in the control group. 2. The Influence Hypothesis: Manipulating the context-level of Rowe’s original vignette will have a significant effect on the participant's level of agreement with Rowe’s conclusion that the suffering is senseless and no greater evil is prevented and no greater good is accomplished. Specifically, it is hypothesized that if participants are given more information regarding when and why forest fires occur (high context) they will show less agreement with Rowe in comparison to the control group. 3. The Conflicting Intuitions Hypothesis: A significant proportion (>20%) of people who share Rowe’s guiding intuition will have conflicting intuitions regarding the problem of evil. In other words, many people who report that their inability to see a point to the target suffering counts as strong evidence in favor of thinking that there is no point to that suffering will also report that if there was a point to the target suffering they would be very unlikely to be aware of it. And to summarize our findings, we found (i) that the target intuition at work in Rowe’s argument is not shared across various demographics (including education level, gender, ethnicity, nationality, and religion); (ii) the inclusion of context greatly diminished participants’ reported perception of pointlessness; and (iii) a significant portion of the population did indeed have conflicting intuitions regarding the problem of evil. For more information on our original findings, see here: https://philpapers.org/rec/MCAECT These initial results were extremely exploratory; however, they raised many questions that we wanted to explore further in subsequent research. In particular, in our follow-up research we’d like to further explore: - alternative indexes for measuring agreement with Rowe; - whether our initial results will replicate; - why context seems to have the impact on the perception of pointlessness that our initial results suggest; - whether specific personality measures can account for some of the intuition variation found in our original research.

The problem of evil is the common problem of both philosophy and theology. Philosophers and kalām scholars have developed a theodicy/defense of divine justice that is in keeping with their understanding of religion, paradigms and methodologies. They have tried to explain and make sense of the evil in the world in accordance with their theories of creation. For this reason, both sides show serious differences in both metaphysical and moral evil. Philosophers have drifted away from rational thought on the topic of metaphysical evil as they have stuck to emanation theory based on fictional assumptions, yet have taken an exceptionally rational path towards moral evil. Kalām scholars, on the other hand, have never been able to disentangle themselves from turning both the matter of natural and moral evil into a metaphysical problem. The truth is that this problem will be more resolvable when it is evaluated together with the laws of universe, testing process and the belief of hereafter. In order to be able to see their point of departure and rational basis in this subject, we have tried to present this article in a comparative manner with the main lines. Kötülük meselesi, hem felsefenin hem de teolojinin ortak problemidir. Filozoflar ve teologlar bu konuda kendi din anlayışlarına, paradigmalarına ve metodolojilerine uygun bir teodise / ilahi adalet savunusu geliştirmişlerdir. Onlar dünyadaki kötülük olgusunu kendi yaratılış teorilerine uygun olarak izah etmeye ve anlamlandırmaya çalışmışlardır. Bu nedenle her iki taraf da hem metafizik hem de ahlaki kötülük konusunda ciddi ayrılıklar göstermektedirler.  Filozoflar, tabii kötülük konusunda, kurgusal varsayımlara dayalı sudur nazariyesine bağlı kaldıklarından rasyonellikten uzaklaşmış; ancak ahlaki kötülükler konusunda son derece rasyonel bir yol izlemişlerdir. Buna karşılık kelamcılar ise hem tabii hem de ahlaki kötülük konusunu metafiziksel bir sorun haline dönüştürmekten kurtulamamışlardır. Hakikat şu ki bu sorun, evrende işleyen yasalar, imtihan süreci ve ahiret inancı ile birlikte değerlendirildiğinde daha makul bir çözüm imkânına kavuşacaktır.Söz konusu ayrılık noktalarını ve onların rasyonel temellerini görebilmek için, bu makalemizde konuyu ana hatlarıyla mukayeseli bir şekilde sunmaya çalıştık.

Book Source: Digital Library of India Item 2015.88469 dc.contributor.author: Daniel Greenleaf Thompson dc.date.accessioned: 2015-06-30T20:47:30Z dc.date.available: 2015-06-30T20:47:30Z dc.date.digitalpublicationdate: 2004-05-26 dc.date.citation: 1887 dc.identifier: RMSC, IIIT-H dc.identifier.barcode: 132084 dc.identifier.origpath: /data7/upload/0173/606 dc.identifier.copyno: 1 dc.identifier.uri: http://www.new.dli.ernet.in/handle/2015/88469 dc.description.numberedpages: 281 dc.description.numberedpages: 45 dc.description.scanningcentre: RMSC, IIIT-H dc.description.main: 1 dc.description.tagged: 0 dc.description.totalpages: 326 dc.format.mimetype: application/pdf dc.language.iso: English dc.publisher.digitalrepublisher: Universal Digital Library dc.publisher: Longmans, Green And Co. dc.rights: Public Domain dc.title: The Problem Of Evil An Introduction To The Practical Sciences

Book Source: Digital Library of India Item 2015.88469 dc.contributor.author: Daniel Greenleaf Thompson dc.date.accessioned: 2015-06-30T20:47:30Z dc.date.available: 2015-06-30T20:47:30Z dc.date.digitalpublicationdate: 2004-05-26 dc.date.citation: 1887 dc.identifier: RMSC, IIIT-H dc.identifier.barcode: 132084 dc.identifier.origpath: /data7/upload/0173/606 dc.identifier.copyno: 1 dc.identifier.uri: http://www.new.dli.ernet.in/handle/2015/88469 dc.description.numberedpages: 281 dc.description.numberedpages: 45 dc.description.scanningcentre: RMSC, IIIT-H dc.description.main: 1 dc.description.tagged: 0 dc.description.totalpages: 326 dc.format.mimetype: application/pdf dc.language.iso: English dc.publisher.digitalrepublisher: Universal Digital Library dc.publisher: Longmans, Green And Co. dc.rights: Public Domain dc.title: The Problem Of Evil An Introduction To The Practical Sciences

Book Source: Digital Library of India Item 2015.88469 dc.contributor.author: Daniel Greenleaf Thompson dc.date.accessioned: 2015-06-30T20:47:30Z dc.date.available: 2015-06-30T20:47:30Z dc.date.digitalpublicationdate: 2004-05-26 dc.date.citation: 1887 dc.identifier: RMSC, IIIT-H dc.identifier.barcode: 132084 dc.identifier.origpath: /data7/upload/0173/606 dc.identifier.copyno: 1 dc.identifier.uri: http://www.new.dli.ernet.in/handle/2015/88469 dc.description.numberedpages: 281 dc.description.numberedpages: 45 dc.description.scanningcentre: RMSC, IIIT-H dc.description.main: 1 dc.description.tagged: 0 dc.description.totalpages: 326 dc.format.mimetype: application/pdf dc.language.iso: English dc.publisher.digitalrepublisher: Universal Digital Library dc.publisher: Longmans, Green And Co. dc.rights: Public Domain dc.title: The Problem Of Evil An Introduction To The Practical Sciences

This week, Pastor Will continues our series through the book of Habakkuk with a message titled: The Problem Of Evil

"THE PROBLEM OF EVIL" is an article from The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, Volume 18 . View more articles from The Journal of Speculative Philosophy . View this article on JSTOR . View this article's JSTOR metadata . You may also retrieve all of this items metadata in JSON at the following URL: https://archive.org/metadata/jstor-25668015

"THE PROBLEM OF EVIL" is an article from The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, Volume 18 . View more articles from The Journal of Speculative Philosophy . View this article on JSTOR . View this article's JSTOR metadata . You may also retrieve all of this items metadata in JSON at the following URL: https://archive.org/metadata/jstor-25668015

"THE PROBLEM OF EVIL" is an article from The Journal of Speculative Philosophy, Volume 18 . View more articles from The Journal of Speculative Philosophy . View this article on JSTOR . View this article's JSTOR metadata . You may also retrieve all of this items metadata in JSON at the following URL: https://archive.org/metadata/jstor-25668015

To support me on Patreon (thank you): http://www.patreon.com/cosmicskeptic To donate to my PayPal (thank you): http://www.paypal.me/cosmicskeptic - VIDEO NOTES Richard Swinburne is an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Oxford, and author of a number of books on the philosophy of religion, the soul, and Christianity, amongst other subjects. - LINKS Buy Richard Swinburne's books (affiliate link): https://amzn.to/42alcXv - TIMESTAMPS 0:00 Introduction 2:09 How has philosophy at Oxford changed since the 1950s? 5:20 What is a human being? 25:27 Do we have free will? 40:12 The problem of evil 50:17 Animal suffering 58:33 Outro - SPECIAL THANKS As always, I would like to direct extra gratitude to my top-tier patrons: Itamar Lev Evan Allen John Early Dmitry C. Seth Balodi James Davis g8speedy James Davis Mouthy Buddha The audio for this episode was produced by Charlie Shan: www.shanmusic.co.uk - CONNECT My Website/Blog: http://www.cosmicskeptic.com SOCIAL LINKS: Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/cosmicskeptic Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cosmicskeptic Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/cosmicskeptic Snapchat: cosmicskeptic The Within Reason Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/within-reason/id1458675168 - CONTACT Business email: [email protected] Or send me something: Alex O'Connor Po Box 1610 OXFORD OX4 9LL ENGLAND ------------------------------------------