This is one of the most difficult problems of religious belief. In other words, Swinburne states that the suffering in which… If God exists, he must be omniscient all-knowing , omnipotent all-powerful , and omnibenevolent all good. His philosophical contributions are primarily in the and. I would certainly not view my power to hammer a nail as a degree of my power to calculate my taxes; they do not appear to be properties of mine along a single dimension. It is clearly problematic whenever someone tries to derive a somewhat quantitative result using a precise quantitative formula where variables can only be examined qualitatively. Swinburne, as a theologian, should be familiar with this possibility, and at least respond to it as a possible means for god to reveal the bad effects of bad decisions to us without us needing to live through them.
Swinburne argues that the theodicist, one who believes that it is not wrong for God to create a world in which there is evil, can logically explain the existence of evil in the world. This is the idea that we cannot know what is true unless we have experienced it using our five senses of sight, smell, hearing, touch, etc. And no such explanation—such as an account of how God's distinct powers are accomplished by some common but infinitely variable mechanism or property—is anywhere to be found in the book. Richard Swinburne gives a careful, clear examination of this problem, and offers an answer: it is because God wants more for us than just pleasure or freedom from suffering. Even though it was a courageous thing that the person stopped the rape, the woman would be better off if the rape had not even happened at all.
When Achilles reaches this new position, the tortoise is again some smaller distance ahead, and so on indefinitely. These goods are instrumental and intrinsic. This book is my introduction to the traditional theodicy of Swinburne. And then Swinburne simply loses his terminus of explanation. Consequently, the cogency of his C-inductive arguments are doubtful, which in turn undermines his cumulative argument via chapter 13 to his P-inductive conclusion. It is better to choose to walk an elderly person across the road instead of deciding to push the elderly person in front of an oncoming car.
Swinburne first develops an account of goods within creation. This outline will be followed by an examination of the major structural flaws that I think make Swinburne's argument less rational and rigorous than it appears on a casual reading. The presence of evil, this privation of the good, is taken to be one of the arguments against the existence of God. The problem of evil is not a correct argument. I suggest that an agent P may allow an evil E to occur, while remaining perfectly good, so long as: 1. There is no explaining going on here, merely explaining-away.
An outline of the argumentative structure of the book follows. This woman, would still suffer from the mentl tortures of being violated. If you cite from these documents, whether for personal or professional purposes, please give appropriate citation with both the name of the author J. Presupposition 1: This is the best of all possible worlds in a moral sense Presupposition 2:Humans cannot develop morally and spiritually in a paradise. Swinburne also discusses the different types of goods that exist in the world.
For example, a man who is schizophrenic may hear voices that tell him to do something that he knows is morally wrong, such as kill somebody. Implicitly, he must hold that h is not identical with any God of an actual religion, for his definition of h contains no such references and is functionally independent of such connections. Consequently I will give subsequent chapters short shrift in this outline. There being evil then it is automatic that there is no such being. Swinburne uses to free-will defense and says that God gave us a choice between doing good and doing evil. Would it not be better for God to intervene and make this person's judgement better? They include logical and evidential arguments. If God existed, he would not allow evil into the world VanPatten, lecture.
Although Swinburne has written prolifically on various aspects of religion—specifically, Abrahamic monotheism— The Existence of God Oxford University Press, 2004 is his centerpiece. Swinburne ultimately aims to reason that we have no good grounds to doubt the veridicality of religious experiences in light of these principles unless the prior probability of God based on other factors is very low. The first premise to fail the indisputability test is that is true, yet Swinburne's entire case for personal explanation in chapter 2 depends upon it. Note that my confidence in the existence of my dog sheds no light whatsoever on the existence of my neighbor's dog. }, where p n represents some power possessed by God.
Evil does exist, therefore, god does not exist. Archived from on 22 February 2014. His is definitely a work of analytic theology as opposed to systematics. The answer to this seems to be that if God is to give us significant control, then there has to be the possibility of really significant bad. And Swinburne claims that infinity is exceedingly simple compared to some specific value. He has been generous, and, more so, he has made it possible for us to be generous.
Not only that, but God has brought about a world in which every person has the possibility of the nearly infinite good of being with God forever. Gray Distinguished Professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Has he improved in this regard? Swinburne argues that some moral evil is going to be necessary, because it is simply a fact that there are good states of affairs which are logically incompatible. I stressed that once h S was precisely defined in chapter 5, it could not be modified later as Swinburne built up his cumulative argument. How this has affected my view of this book is with the mixed feeling I get as a Christian.
It may be read on its own as a self-standing treatment of this eternal philosophical issue. Since Swinburne takes as the only alternatives to h, he fails to account for h Rn —other theistic hypotheses. Swinburne uses to free-will… The Deductive Problem of Evil One of the major philosophical debates concerning God's existence involves the problem of evil. If we are to have all this, there will inevitably be suffering for the short period of our lives on Earth. The hint of trouble stems from what Swinburne fails to say here.