Sceptical Theism, the Butterfly Effect and Bracketing the Unknown

Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 81:71-86 (2017)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Sceptical theism claims that we have vast ignorance about the realm of value and the connections, causal and modal, between goods and bads. This ignorance makes it reasonable for a theist to say that God has reasons beyond our ken for allowing the horrendous evils we observe. But if so, then does this not lead to moral paralysis when we need to prevent evils ourselves? For, for aught that we know, there are reasons beyond our ken for us to allow the evils, and so we should not prevent them. This paralysis argument, however, shall be argued to rest on a confusion between probabilities and expected utilities. A connection between this paralysis argument and Lenman's1 discussion of the butterfly effect and chaos will be drawn, and the solution offered will apply in both cases.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,779

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Skeptical theism and Skepticism About the External World and Past.Stephen Law - 2017 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 81:55-70.
Skeptical theism and the problem of moral aporia.Mark Piper - 2007 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 62 (2):65 - 79.
Skeptical Theism and Divine Permission - A Reply to Anderson.John Danaher - 2014 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 75 (2):101-118.
Sceptical theism and moral scepticism.Ira M. Schnall - 2007 - Religious Studies 43 (1):49-69.
Reconsidering the Alien Doctor Analogy: a challenge to skeptical theism.Luke Tucker - 2023 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 94 (2):213-223.
The problem of evil: skeptical theism leads to moral paralysis.Scott Sehon - 2010 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 67 (2):67 - 80.
Analyzing Sterba’s argument.Michael Tooley - 2020 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 87 (3):217-222.
Progress and the argument from evil.Stephen R. L. Clark - 2004 - Religious Studies 40 (2):181-192.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-12-02

Downloads
85 (#194,206)

6 months
12 (#306,613)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Alexander R. Pruss
Baylor University

Citations of this work

God and gratuitous evil: Between the rock and the hard place.Luis R. G. Oliveira - 2023 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 94 (3):317-345.
Chance and the Dissipation of our Acts’ Effects.Derek Shiller - 2021 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 99 (2):334-348.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Reasons and Persons.Joseph Margolis - 1986 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 47 (2):311-327.
Practical Reason and Norms.Joseph Raz - 1975 - Law and Philosophy 12 (3):329-343.
Consequentialism and Cluelessness.James Lenman - 2000 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 29 (4):342-370.
Sceptical theism and evidential arguments from evil.Michael J. Almeida & Graham Oppy - 2003 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 81 (4):496 – 516.
Epistemic humility, arguments from evil, and moral skepticism.Daniel Howard-Snyder - 2009 - Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion 2:17-57.

Add more references