David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of the History of Philosophy 51 (1):49-73 (2013)
Theodicy and Toleration Seem at first glance to be an unlikely pair of topics to treat in a single paper. Toleration usually means putting up with beliefs or actions with which one disagrees, and it is practiced because the beliefs or actions in question are not disagreeable enough to justify interference. It is usually taken to be a topic for moral and political philosophy. Theodicy, on the other hand, is the attempt to solve the problem of evil; that is, to explain the origin of suffering and sin in a way that does not make God a moral cause of those evils.1 While theodicy concerns the notions of good and evil, and could therefore be considered a moral topic, historical and contemporary discussions of it have ..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Michael W. Hickson (2011). Reductio Ad Malum: Bayle's Early Skepticism About Theodicy. Modern Schoolman 88 (3/4):201-221.
Michael W. Hickson (2010). The Message of Bayle's Last Title: Providence and Toleration in the Entretiens de Maxime Et de Thémiste. Journal of the History of Ideas 71 (4):547-567.
Lars Fr H. Svendsen (2010). A Philosophy of Evil. Dalkey Archive Press.
Brett Gaul (2004). Is the Problem of Evil a Problem for Descartes? Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 78:209-220.
John Kilcullen (1988). Sincerity and Truth: Essays on Arnauld, Bayle, and Toleration. Oxford University Press.
Sam Duncan (2012). Moral Evil, Freedom and the Goodness of God: Why Kant Abandoned Theodicy. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20 (5):973-991.
Peter Forrest (2010). Why Richard Swinburne Won't 'Rot in Hell': A Defense of Tough-Minded Theodicy. [REVIEW] Sophia 49 (1):37-47.
Nathan Nobis (2002). The Real Problem of Infant and Animal Suffering. Philo 5 (2):216-225.
Eric Roark (2006). Aquinas's Unsuccessful Theodicy. Philosophy and Theology 18 (2):247-256.
Richard Swinburne (1988). Does Theism Need a Theodicy? Canadian Journal of Philosophy 18 (2):287 - 311.
Richard Swinburne (1995). Theodicy, Our Well-Being, and God's Rights. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 38 (1-3):75 - 91.
Jill Graper Hernandez (2013). The Anxious Believer: Macaulay's Prescient Theodicy. [REVIEW] International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 73 (3):175-187.
Added to index2011-12-05
Total downloads4 ( #258,452 of 1,102,723 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #84,424 of 1,102,723 )
How can I increase my downloads?