David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Religious Studies 37 (4):435 - 449 (2001)
The first part of this paper exposits William Rowe's latest version of the evidential argument from evil. Integral to this new version is what we can call the 'level-playing field' requirement, which regulates probability values. It is the argument of the second part of this paper that either the two premises of the new version are regulated by the level-playing-field requirement or they're not. If they are both regulated, then no one would be in position to rationally accept one of those premises; if they're not both regulated, then the theist would have good reason to reject the one that is. Either way, Rowe's latest version of the evidential argument fails.
|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 Almeida (2004). The New Evidential Argument Defeated. Philo 7 (1):22-35.
Daniel Howard-Snyder (2005). On Rowe's Argument From Particular Horrors. In Kelly Clark (ed.), Readings in Philosophy of Religion. Broadview.
Nick Trakakis (2006). Rowe's New Evidential Argument From Evil: Problems and Prospects. [REVIEW] Sophia 45 (1):57-77.
Daniel Howard-Snyder (1990). Surplus Evil. Philosophical Quarterly 40:78-86.
Richard Carrier (2007). Fatal Flaws in Michael Almeida's Alleged 'Defeat' of Rowe's New Evidential Argument From Evil. Philo 10 (1):85-90.
Krzysztof Hubaczek (2007). William Rowe's Bayesian Argument from Evil against the Existence of God: An Attempt at Analysis and Assessment (in Polish). Diametros 14:32 - 52.
Nick Trakakis (2003). What No Eye Has Seen. Philo 6 (2):263-279.
Richard Otte (2002). Rowe's Probabilistic Argument From Evil. Faith and Philosophy 19 (2):147-171.
James Beilby (1995). William Rowe on the Evidential Value of Appearances. Faith and Philosophy 12 (2):251-259.
J. L. Schellenberg (2005). The Hiddenness Argument Revisited (II). Religious Studies 41 (3):287 - 303.
James Beilby (1996). Does the Empirical Problem of Evil Prove That Theism Is Improbable? Religious Studies 32 (3):315 - 323.
Michael Almeida (2008). Critically Muddled. Philo 11 (1):120-129.
Daniel Howard-Snyder (ed.) (1996). The Evidential Argument From Evil. Indiana University Press.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads17 ( #114,637 of 1,692,540 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #181,215 of 1,692,540 )
How can I increase my downloads?