Graduate studies at Western
Faith and Philosophy 19 (2):147-171 (2002)
|Abstract||In this article I investigate Rowe's recent probabilistic argument from evil. By using muddy Venn diagrams to present his argument, we see that although his argument is fallacious, it can be modified in a way that strengthens it considerably. I then discuss the recent exchange between Rowe and Plantinga over this argument. Although Rowe's argument is not an argument from degenerate evidence as Plantinga claimed, it is problematic because it is an argument from partitioned evidence. I conclude by discussing the modified argument and the epistemic framework Rowe is assuming in his argument|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
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.
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.
Michael Almeida (2004). The New Evidential Argument Defeated. Philo 7 (1):22-35.
Richard Carrier (2007). Fatal Flaws in Michael Almeida's Alleged 'Defeat' of Rowe's New Evidential Argument From Evil. Philo 10 (1):85-90.
Richard Otte (2000). Evidential Arguments From Evil. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 48 (1):1-10.
James Beilby (1996). Does the Empirical Problem of Evil Prove That Theism Is Improbable? Religious Studies 32 (3):315 - 323.
Klaas J. Kraay (2005). William L. Rowe's A Priori Argument for Atheism. Faith and Philosophy 22 (2):211-234.
Georges Dicker (1988). A Refutation of Rowe's Critique of Anselm's Ontological Argument. Faith and Philosophy 5 (2):193-202.
Michael Almeida (2008). Critically Muddled. Philo 11 (1):120-129.
Alvin Plantinga (1998). Degenerate Evidence and Rowe's New Evidential Argument From Evil. Noûs 32 (4):531-544.
Daniel Howard-Snyder (1990). Surplus Evil. Philosophical Quarterly 40:78-86.
Daniel Howard-Snyder & Michael Bergmann (2003). Reply to Rowe. In Michael Peterson (ed.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Religion. Blackwell.
Nick Trakakis (2003). What No Eye Has Seen. Philo 6 (2):263-279.
Added to index2011-01-18
Total downloads34 ( #40,578 of 733,590 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,864 of 733,590 )
How can I increase my downloads?