Teaching & Learning Guide for: Theistic Arguments from Horrendous Evils

In recent years, much of the debate within philosophy religion has focused on problem horrendous evils. Horrendous evils constitute a unique class which presumably poses stronger objection to existence omni-God than other classes However, while generally been taken be evidence against God, some philosophers have suggested that it may for God. This article discusses three different kinds theistic arguments from The first argument emphasizes theism more resources naturalism explain why we find certain objectively horrifying. second focuses notion that, given cruel world live in, posture optimism is consistent with naturalism. third begins assumption responses are reasonable, and premise, explains each these conditioned picture world. provides starting point those who interested in There significant space existing literature work done object to, and/or develop, further. Author Recommends: Plantinga, A. (2007). Appendix: Two Dozen (or so) Theistic Arguments. D.-P. Baker (Ed.), Alvin Plantinga. Cambridge University Press. (pp. 223-226). paper Plantinga's brief formulation ‘argument horrifying evil’. (1997). A Christian Life Partly Lived. K. J. Clark Philosophers Who Believe: Spiritual Journeys 11 Leading Thinkers. InterVarsity explanation evil’ an autobiographical perspective. Adams, M. (2013). God Because Evil: Pragmatic Argument Evil Belief P. McBrayer & D. Howard-Snyder (Eds.), Blackwell Companion Problem Evil. Wiley-Blackwell. Adams' ‘pragmatic Nagasawa, Yujin (2018). “The Atheists” Eight Views Dialogue, ed. N. Trakakis. Oxford similar by examining relationship between theism, naturalism, optimism. Volf, (2005). I protest, therefore believe. Century, 122(3), 39. Volf's discussion reasonable responses’ response protest. https://stanford.library.sydney.edu.au/archives/spr2014/entries/moral-arguments-god/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/moral-arguments-god/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pragmatic-belief-god/ Philpapers https://philpapers.org/browse/arguments-for-theism https://docs.google.com/document/d/1dprquqrzQxJsmOArxEoBDaMx15T9T--P8dagUqX6kQI/edit Jackson, E. (2021). Explaining Belief. Capturing Christianity Conference. https://youtu.be/sukh4FeGaEo (2009). Marilyn McCord Adams Philosophy Bites. (Podcast). https://philosophybites.com/2009/07/marilyn-mccord-adams-on-evil.html Sample Syllabus: Week I: Introduction Stewart Sutherland (1989). Evils Goodness Proceedings Aristotelian Society, 63, 297–323. II: Objectively Horrifying Arguments Existence of. Craig Shorter Routledge Encyclopaedia Philosophy. Routledge. Van Inwagen, (2003). (Chapter 1, footnote 14). (2010). Naturalism, Theism, Obligation Supervenience. Faith Philosophy, 27(3), 247–272. https://doi.org/10.5840/faithphil201027328 Wielenberg, defense non-natural, non-theistic moral realism. 26(1), 23–41. https://doi.org/10.5840/faithphil20092612 III: Roth, (1981). Theodicy Protest. S. T. Davis Encountering Live Options Theodicy. John Knox (See Nagasawa's replies). IV: Reasonable Responses Dostoyevsky, F. (1879/1992). Brothers Karamazov. Everyman's Library. Translated Richard Pevear Larissa Volokhonsky. (Chapter: ‘Rebellion’) Katz, T., Biderman, S., Greenberg, G. Wrestling God: Jewish Theological during after Holocaust. (Students can choose read any short chapters). What ‘horrendous evils’? Do you think distinction non-horrendous meaningful? Why do evils’ gaining attention literature? Some argued designed prove Others aim attaining proof impossible or highly improbable, should modest: they instead strive probabilities (they make God's probable)¸ pointers God), inference best suggest phenomena). light discussion, what aims ‘theistic be? intends omni-God. arguments, their current formulation, towards omni-God? Alternatively, consider whether kind need not possess traditional omni attributes. Put differently, if successful, attributes God) require? Relatedly, supposing omni-God, how could proponent thesis revise develop such would Can ways reconstruct evils, pragmatic responses? problems prospects your reconstruction arguments? How Dostoyevsky's Ivan Karamazov Wiesel's Berish relate Many further analysed developed appealing disciplines (such as literature, psychology etc). related concepts, beyond presented this paper/course? I'm grateful anonymous reviewer thoughtful suggestions previous version guide.