Human beings possess a libertarian free will, which means freedom in the sense of the power to make a choice or to refuse to do so. And this is the catch that confounds h S: The second, which can be labeled the indirect inductive approach, argues instead that theism can be shown to be unlikely to be true by establishing that there is some alternative hypothesis—other than the mere negation of theism—that is logically incompatible with theism, and more probable than theism.
A full explanation of some phenomenon E is one where nothing remains unexplained about E in the sense that the factors that precipitated E necessarily entailed it p. It looks that this makes sense only when seen as part of a more complete package, including life after death whatever that means.
Or so Swinburne's argument goes. Note that my confidence in the existence of my dog sheds no light whatsoever on the existence of my neighbor's dog.
The theory of the evolved human soul which I have been advocating in this book is, I believe, that of the Bible. In terms of the notation introduced earlier, he says that h explains e, thus lending support to h.
What are clearly of interest to people in an age of religious skepticism are arguments to the existence or nonexistence of God in which the premises are known to be true by people of all theistic or atheistic persuasions.
If God exists, then he is an omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect person. The woman who is getting raped will still feel mental pain after the good person stopped the rapist. As an incompatibility argument, or as an evidential argument.
There is no explaining going on here, merely explaining-away.
Theism also explains individual religious experience. Sociopathy is orthogonal to the dimension of rationality; a sociopath can be highly intelligent, rational, and functional.
God is conceived analogously as a person that acts with a purpose. God is "omnipotent"—able to do whatever is logically possible. Swinburne tries to overcome this imprecision by introducing numerous examples and analogues, but this just muddies the waters even more.
The main argument that the theodicist uses is the free-will defense, which claims that God gave humans the freedom to choose between doing acts of good and acts of evil. It is also hard to see, however, how this can be sufficient either. Bringing about the existence of a second divine individual and a third divine individual are construed by Swinburne as inevitable actions or actions of essence i.
And throughout the book, he asserts a great deal, not just h S. But if either of these things is the case, then the prevention of all evil might well make the world a worse place.
Certainly there appear to be some general commonalities, but that is hardly enough for a precise match. What he does say is: Edited by Alan G. Part three considers the actual evidence for the resurrection as an event such as the appearances of the risen Jesus and the empty tomb.
Consequently I will give subsequent chapters short shrift in this outline. But the above argument is subject to a very different sort of criticism, one that is connected with a feature of the above argument which seems to me important, but which is not often commented upon—the fact, namely, that the above argument is formulated in terms of axiological concepts, that is, in terms of the goodness or badness, the desirability or undesirability, of states of affairs.
In doing so, they cast aside a powerful philosophical tool for theism. Statement 1 involves both empirical claims, and moral claims, but the empirical claims are surely true, and, setting aside the question of the existence of objective rightmaking and wrongmaking properties, the moral claims are surely also very plausible.
He is, therefore, attempting to make a case for what he regards as a truth claim common to all three religions. The Existence and Order of the Universe The existence of the universe is a phenomenon that provides evidence for the existence of God.
Swinburne himself is somewhat belatedly forthright about this: Here the idea is that rather than employing concepts that focus upon the value or disvalue of states of affairs, one instead uses concepts that focus upon the rightness and wrongness of actions, and upon the properties—rightmaking properties and wrongmaking properties—that determine whether an action is one that ought to be performed, or ought not to be performed, other things being equal.
After a long-winded examination, he concludes that unless the agent is under some nonrational influence like "weakness of will," he will not choose a morally inferior act over a morally superior one against his better judgment. The case for the existence of God is a cumulative one based upon observable phenomena and human experience.
It is much easier to accept "god"—with lower case g—as a universal. Chapters 7 to 12 deal with traditional arguments for the existence of God, such as the cosmological and teleological arguments, as well as defenses against the traditional arguments from evil and God's hiddenness.
Oxford,It is important to notice, however, that in formulating an indirect inductive argument from evil, one need not proceed along the route that Draper chooses.
More specifically, Swinburne asserts, "Having an intention is not something that happens to an agent, but something that she does" p. Providence and the Problem of Evil, (part 4 of his tetralogy on Christian Doctrines) An Analysis and Critique of Richard Swinburne's Philosophical Defense of Propositional Revelation." PhD dissertation, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary Parsons, Keith M.
God and the Burden of Proof: Plantinga. Richard Swinburne's "The Problem Of Evil": God's Existence Philosophers have looked for ways to explain God's existence for centuries.
One such argment that the believer must justify in order to maintain the. The Problem of Evil. The Problem of Evil is the result of: Logical Analysis.
) and Richard Swinburne. According to this view the pains and sufferings of the world are meant by God to act as a means of producing a truly good person. • The problem of evil, many theists say, concerns not the lack of perfect goodness in the world, but only the presence of real badness (“positive bad states”).
• The theist can admit that the world could be better in many ways. God, for the theist, is the source of. Swinburne’s response to the problem of evil Jeﬀ Speaks February 23, Swinburne’s aim is to respond to the problem of evil by constructing “a theodicy, an explanation of why God would allow evil to occur.” (95) In order to do this, he divides.
Notes on Swinburne, "On Why God Allows Evil" Introduction Mackie argues that the problem of evil proves that either no god exists, or at least that the god of Orthodox Judaism, Notes on Swinburne, "On Why God Allows Evil" Notes on Swinburne’s “Why God Allows Evil” 1.
The kinds of goods a theistic god would provide: deeper.An analysis of richard swinburnes the problem of evil