Religious Studies 37 (4):373-396 (2001)
|Abstract||I start from Mill's words about Mansel and the problem of evil. In this dispute Mansel has generally been thought to have come off worst. However, Mansel was clearly right to this extent: that what would make a man a good man would not be the same as what made God good. This is because, quite generally, what makes something good of its kind, where we can talk about goodness at all, varies with the kind. With Aristotle we must say: the criteria are fixed by the thing's ergon, or at least by something analogous. On this account, it would seem that God must be perfect, since as an intelligent agent He does supremely well what is in the nature of an intelligent agent to do. This seems to lead to the right solution to the problem of evil. But Mill also had something useful to contribute. He saw that there would be a consequent difficulty in regard to revelation. This difficulty seems to be severe and insufficiently discussed.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Andrew Chignell (1998). The Problem of Infant Suffering. Religious Studies 34 (2):205-217.
David Basinger (1987). Evil and a Finite God. Philosophy Research Archives 13:285-287.
Dennis Earl (2011). Divine Intimacy and the Problem of Horrendous Evil. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 69 (1):17-28.
Lars Fr H. Svendsen (2010). A Philosophy of Evil. Dalkey Archive Press.
William Hasker (2007). D. Z. Phillips' Problems with Evil and with God. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 61 (3):151 - 160.
James R. Beebe, Logical Problem of Evil. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
R. Zachary Manis (2011). Could God Do Something Evil? A Molinist Solution to the Problem of Divine Freedom. Faith and Philosophy 28 (2):209-223.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads35 ( #34,066 of 548,976 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,511 of 548,976 )
How can I increase my downloads?