| CONTENTS | 8 |
---|
| FOREWORD | 12 |
---|
| PREFACE | 14 |
---|
| NOTE ON GENDER-INCLUSIVE LANGUAGE | 18 |
---|
| 1. INTRODUCTION | 19 |
---|
| 1 AIMS AND LIMITATIONS | 20 |
| 2 METHODOLOGY | 22 |
| 3 WHAT IS A GOOD ARGUMENT? | 26 |
| 4 OVERVIEW | 28 |
| NOTES | 29 |
| 2. BACKGROUND TO THE PROBLEM OF EVIL | 35 |
---|
| 1 ORTHODOX THEISM | 35 |
| 2 THE PROBLEM OF EVIL | 41 |
| Philosophical Background | 41 |
| Historical Background | 51 |
| NOTES | 53 |
| 3. ROWES EVIDENTIAL ARGUMENTS FROM EVIL | 65 |
---|
| 1 THE EARLY ROWE (1978 - 86) | 65 |
| The 1979 Argument | 67 |
| The Theological Premise | 68 |
| The Factual Premise | 69 |
| Wykstra on Rowes Case in Support of the | 73 |
| Factual Premise | 73 |
| 2 THE MIDDLE ROWE (1988 - 95) | 75 |
| The Factual Premise Revisited | 75 |
| The Inference from P to Q | 76 |
| The Structure of the Argument | 79 |
| 3 THE LATE ROWE (1996 - PRESENT) | 80 |
| Rowes New Evidential Argument | 80 |
| Atheism or Agnosticism? | 85 |
| Rowes Resurrection of the | 85 |
| Rowes Resurrection of the | 85 |
---|
| 86 | 85 |
---|
| Argument from Evil | 86 |
| NOTES | 89 |
| 4. WHAT NO EYE HAS SEEN: THE EPISTEMIC FOUNDATIONS OF WYKSTRAS CORNEA CRITIQUE | 95 |
---|
| 1 THE ORIGINAL CORNEA | 96 |
| 2 THE PROBLEM WITH C1 | 100 |
| 3 CORNEA AND THE PRINCIPLE OF CREDULITY | 102 |
| 4 COUNTEREXAMPLES TO C2–C4 | 106 |
| 5 C4 AND NOSEEUM INFERENCES | 108 |
| NOTES | 110 |
| 5. CORNEA APPLIED TO ROWES EVIDENTIAL ARGUMENT | 117 |
---|
| 1 APPLYING C42 TO ROWE’S ARGUMENTS | 117 |
| 2 ROWES RESPONSE TO CORNEA | 119 |
| 3 CORNEA AND THE BURDEN OF REASONABILITY | 119 |
| 4 ROWE ON STEP 2 OF WYKSTRAS CORNEA CRITIQUE | 122 |
| 5 WYKSTRAS ARGUMENT - ROWES VERSION | 124 |
| The RST - EST Distinction | 126 |
| The Inference from (5) to (6) Re-examined | 127 |
| The Prospects for EST | 128 |
| Rowes Restriction to RST | 134 |
| 6 WYKSTRAS ARGUMENT - THE ANALOGICAL VERSION | 136 |
| Analogical Reasoning | 137 |
| Rowes Critique of Wykstras Parent Analogy | 139 |
| Wykstras Revised Parent Analogy | 140 |
| Rowes Critique of the New Parent Analogy | 142 |
| NOTES | 146 |
| 6. FURTHER OBJECTIONS TO ROWES NOSEEUM ASSUMPTION | 153 |
---|
| 1 HOWARD-SNYDER’S ARGUMENT FROM COMPLEX GOODS | 153 |
| 2 DURSTONS ARGUMENT FROM THE COMPLEXITY OF HISTORY | 156 |
| 3 THE PROGRESS ARGUMENT | 163 |
| 4 ALSTONS ANALOGIES | 172 |
| NOTES | 175 |
| 7. IN SUPPORT OF THE INFERENCE FROM INSCRUTABLE TO POINTLESS EVIL | 181 |
---|
| 1 THE ARGUMENT FROM MORAL SCEPTICISM | 181 |
| 2 ROWES CASE IN SUPPORT OF RNA | 192 |
| Case 1 | 196 |
| Case 2 | 196 |
| 3 CONCLUDING REMARKS | 199 |
| NOTES | 199 |
| 8. THE PROBLEM OF DIVINE HIDDENNESS | 207 |
---|
| 1 WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? | 207 |
| 2 ANALOGIES IN SUPPORT OF RNA4 | 209 |
| 3 THE CASE AGAINST RNA4 | 212 |
| The Sceptical Theist Response | 212 |
| The Appeal to Human Freedom | 215 |
| 4 IN CONCLUSION | 234 |
| NOTES | 235 |
| 9. META-THEODICY: ADEQUACY CONDITIONS FOR THEODICY | 245 |
---|
| 1 THE EVILS TO BE EXPLAINED | 246 |
| 2 THE GOODS TO BE INVOKED | 251 |
| T3 HE NATURE OF THEODICAL EXPLANATION | 256 |
| 4 SUMMARY | 260 |
| NOTES | 261 |
| 10. THEODICY PROPER, OR CASTING LIGHT ON THE WAYS OF GOD: HORRENDOUS MORAL EVIL | 269 |
---|
| 1 SKETCH OF A THEODICY | 269 |
| 2 PROBLEM I: CURTAILING THE EXERCISE OF FREE WILL | 274 |
| 3 PROBLEM II: NECESSARY EVILS? | 279 |
| Tiernos | 279 |
| Tiernos | 279 |
---|
| 279 | 279 |
---|
| The Inadequacy of Tiernos | 279 |
| The Inadequacy of Tiernos | 279 |
---|
| 281 | 279 |
---|
| 4 CONCLUSION | 287 |
| NOTES | 287 |
| 11. THEODICIES FOR NATURAL EVIL | 293 |
---|
| 1 SOUL-MAKING AND NATURAL EVIL | 294 |
| 2 SWINBURNES FREE WILL THEODICY | 297 |
| 3 REICHENBACH’S NATURAL LAW THEODICY | 305 |
| 4 CONCLUSION | 313 |
| NOTES | 314 |
| 12. THE COMPATIBILITY OF GRATUITOUS EVIL WITH THEISM | 321 |
---|
| 1 VAN INWAGEN’S GOD OF CHANCE | 322 |
| 2 VAN INWAGEN’S NO MINIMUM THESIS | 327 |
| 3 TAKING THE STING OUT OF THE NO MINIMUM THESIS | 332 |
| 4 PETERSON’S REJECTION OF METICULOUS PROVIDENCE | 335 |
| Peterson on the Defensive | 336 |
| Peterson on the Offensive | 338 |
| 4 CONCLUSION | 342 |
| NOTES | 343 |
| 13. CONCLUSION: IS ROWES EVIDENTIAL ARGUMENT SUCCESSFUL? | 351 |
---|
| 1 THE | 351 |
| 1 THE | 351 |
| 352 | 351 |
---|
| 2 RECONCEIVING GOD | 355 |
| Rejecting Gods Perfect Goodness | 355 |
| Rejecting Divine Omnipotence | 356 |
| The Worship - Worthiness of God | 358 |
| 3 CONCLUDING REMARKS | 359 |
| NOTES | 360 |
| BIBLIOGRAPHY | 365 |
---|
| INDEX | 387 |