Philo 8 (2):109-122 (2005)
Bruce Russell has classified evidential arguments from evil into four types, one of which is the type-4 argument. Rather than begin with observations of evils that appear to be gratuitous, type-4 arguments simply begin with observations of evils. The next step, and the heart of a type-4 argument, is an abductive inference (inference to the best explanation) from those observations, to the conclusion that there is gratuitous evil. Reflection upon the consequential complexity of history, however, reveals that we have no objective grounds for making the key, abductive inference, thus, all type-4 arguments from evil fail
|Keywords||Philosophy and Religion|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
The Consequential Complexity of History and Gratuitous Evil.Kirk Durston - 2000 - Religious Studies 36 (1):65-80.
On the a Priori Rejection of Evidential Arguments From Evil.Daniel Howard-Snyder & John Hawthorne - 1994 - Sophia:33-47.
Is Radical Evil Banal? Is Banal Evil Radical?Paul Formosa - 2007 - Philosophy and Social Criticism 33 (6):717-735.
Exploring Evil and Philosophical Failure: A Critical Notice of Peter van Inwagen's *The Problem of Evil.John Martin Fischer & Neal A. Tognazzini - 2007 - Faith and Philosophy 24 (4):458-474.
Evidential Arguments From Evil.Richard Otte - 2000 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 48 (1):1-10.
INTRODUCTION: The Evidential Argument From Evil.Daniel Howard-Snyder - 1996 - In The Evidential Argument from Evil.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads22 ( #227,207 of 2,168,157 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #127,274 of 2,168,157 )
How can I increase my downloads?