Alvin Plantinga. University of Notre Dame. Follow. Abstract. This book discusses and exemplifies the philosophy of religion, or philosophical reflection on central. God, Freedom, And Evil – Alvin Plantinga – Free download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read online for free. PAGE 18 IS MISSING. HERE IS THE MISSING. Alvin Plantinga is held by many to be the greatest living Christian philosopher, and has made immense contributions to various areas of.

Author: JoJojas Vonris
Country: Senegal
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Science
Published (Last): 18 December 2018
Pages: 460
PDF File Size: 2.8 Mb
ePub File Size: 1.64 Mb
ISBN: 380-8-43206-810-4
Downloads: 93157
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Tugrel

In his discussion of natural theology arguments to prove the existence of God and natural atheology arguments for the falsehood of theistic belief Plantinga focuses on two frfedom the traditional arguments: Plantinga presents the logical problem of evil as set out by the famous philosopher J.

Logical Problem of Evil | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Instead, Hick claims that human beings are unfinished and in the midst of being made all that God intended them to be. Therefore, a maximally great being exists.

He seems constitutionally incapable of choosing or even wanting to do what is wrong. It is important to note that MSR1 directly conflicts with a common assumption about what kind of world God could have created. Why create a universe with even the possibility of corruption?

God, Freedom, and Evil – Alvin Plantinga : Eerdmans

According to classical theism, believers in heaven will somehow be changed so that they will no longer commit any sins. Evil and the God of Loverevised ed. Even so, in the end, Plantinga is respectfully modest in his survey of the argument in his end form of it, as he states, “What I claim for this argument, therefore, is that it establishes, not the truth of theism, but it’s rational acceptability.


This orthodox view of heaven poses the following significant challenges to Plantinga’s view: The Argument from Evil in Philosophy of Religion. The Physiognomy of Responsibility. Mackie, who argued religious belief is irrational because it leads the theist to a contradiction due to the beliefs a theist holds.

He is an American analytic philosopher, the John A. To begin with, MSR1 presupposes the view of free will known as “libertarianism”:. An earthquake kills hundreds in Peru. Introducing the Problem Journalist and best-selling author Lee Strobel commissioned George Barna, the public-opinion pollster, to conduct a nationwide survey.

He addresses two topics: In God, Freedom, and Evil Alvin Plantinga AP attempts to rebut the logical problem of evil [i]which posits that the following two propositions [i] are inconsistent:. People in this world couldn’t do morally bad things if they wanted to.

Finally, Plantinga appraises St. Anyways, I’d recommend this book to anybody who doesn’t mind heavy thinking about the existence of God.

In other words, it appears that W 3 isn’t impossible after all. Although I believe Plantinga successfully reasons his positions in God, Freedom, and EvilI do not think he will convince anyone to switch sides.

Logical Problem of Evil

Peter, Thank you for clarifying the use of the term “world. In the last section we noted that many people will find MSR2 ‘s explanation of natural evil extremely difficult to believe because it assumes the literal existence of Adam and Eve and the literal occurrence of the Fall. Having read through Saint Thomas work on creation, and on God some of the material was repetitive but the book is only pages it well worth the read, for anyone interested in philosophy of religion, or anyone who likes to think hard!!!!


Yes, I liked the book: He shows using logic how free will results in evil and therefore does not disproof God.

God, Freedom, and Evil

Divine Nature and Human Language: In response to this formulation of the problem of evil, Plantinga showed that this charge of inconsistency was mistaken. If you can show that x is merely possible, you will have refuted If God has a morally sufficient reason for allowing evil and suffering, theists claim, it will probably look something like Mrs. It’s only the free will defense but with a more philosophical language. Any two or three of them might gov true at the same time; but there is no way that all of them could be true.

According to Plantinga, people in the actual world are free in the most robust sense of that term. So, if one of them were faced with three possible courses of action—two of which were morally good and one of which was morally bad—this person would not be free with respect to the morally bad option.

In constructing the logical problem of evil, the atheologian is implicitly arguing that God cannot do the logically impossible. Horrible things of all kinds happen in our world—and that has been the story since the dawn of civilization.

That ebil, that person would not be able to choose any bad option even if they wanted to. This was a good short-yet-complex freddom work to read through over a weekend.