Religious Studies 36 (2):209-219 (2000)
My review of Swinburne's elaborate and ingenious higher-good type theodicy will begin with an examination of his argument for why the theist needs a theodicy in the first place. After a preliminary sketch of his theodicy and its crucial free-will plank, its rational-choice theoretic arguments will be critically scrutinized
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Why Richard Swinburne Won't 'Rot in Hell': A Defense of Tough-Minded Theodicy. [REVIEW]Peter Forrest - 2010 - Sophia 49 (1):37-47.
Some Major Strands of Theodicy.Richard Swinburne - 1996 - In D. Howard-Snycer (ed.), The Evidential Argument From Evil. Indiana Univ Pr. pp. 30-48.
Theodicy, Our Well-Being, and God's Rights.Richard Swinburne - 1995 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 38 (1-3):75 - 91.
Richard Swinburne, the Existence of God, and Principle P.Jeremy Gwiazda - 2009 - Sophia 48 (4):393-398.
Richard Swinburne, the Existence of God, and Exact Numerical Values.Jeremy Gwiazda - 2010 - Philosophia 38 (2):357-363.
Richard Swinburne, Providence and the Problem of Evil.Paul Draper - 2001 - Noûs 35 (3):456–474.
A Theodicy of Heaven and Hell.Richard Swinburne - 1983 - In A. J. Freddoso (ed.), The Existence and Nature of God. Univ Notre Dame Pr. pp. 37-54.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads49 ( #105,818 of 2,163,870 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #348,100 of 2,163,870 )
How can I increase my downloads?