The Logical Problem of Evil
The argument is valid.
Every inference was checked by machine. Objection O1 stands against P2. So C1 is contested.
flowchart TD
classDef axiom fill:#f6efd9,stroke:#a8842a,color:#23212b;
classDef premise fill:#e7edf7,stroke:#1f4e9c,color:#23212b;
classDef deduction fill:#f3f4f1,stroke:#5b6b85,color:#23212b;
classDef conclusion fill:#d6e1f3,stroke:#1f4e9c,stroke-width:3px,color:#23212b;
classDef objection fill:#f7e3e1,stroke:#b3261e,color:#23212b;
classDef reply fill:#f3f4f1,stroke:#7a5c2e,color:#23212b;
classDef imported stroke-dasharray:4 3;
classDef defeated fill:#f3f4f1,stroke:#b3261e,stroke-dasharray:6 3,color:#8a8796;
classDef undecided stroke-dasharray:2 2;
classDef overruled fill:#f3f4f1,stroke:#c9ccc6,color:#8a8796;
Mackie(["Mackie: J. L. Mackie, Evil and Omnipotence, Mind<br/>64 (1955)"]):::axiom
Theism(["Theism: God, if God exists, is omnipotent and<br/>wholly good."]):::axiom
P1["<b>P1</b>: If God exists, God is omnipotent and<br/>wholly good.<br/><i>God → Omnipotent ∧ WhollyGood</i>"]:::premise
P2["<b>P2</b>: An omnipotent, wholly good being would<br/>eliminate every evil.<br/><i>Omnipotent ∧ WhollyGood → ¬Evil</i>"]:::premise
P3["<b>P3</b>: Evil exists.<br/><i>Evil</i>"]:::premise
C1["<b>C1</b>: Therefore God does not exist.<br/><i>¬God</i>"]:::conclusion
O1{{"<b>O1</b>: Free will defence (Plantinga, God,<br/>Freedom, and Evil, 1974): a world with<br/>free creatures who sometimes do wrong<br/>may be better than any world without<br/>them, and even omnipotence cannot make<br/>free creatures always choose well."}}:::objection
R1{{"<b>R1</b>: Mackie: God could have made creatures<br/>who freely always choose the good."}}:::reply
R2{{"<b>R2</b>: Plantinga: possibly every creature God<br/>could create suffers from transworld<br/>depravity, so such a world may not be<br/>within God's power to actualize."}}:::reply
class C1 defeated
class P2 defeated
class R1 overruled
Theism -.-> P1
Mackie -.-> P2
Mackie -.-> P3
P1 --> C1
P2 --> C1
P3 --> C1
O1 -. objects .-> P2
R1 -. replies .-> O1
R2 -. replies .-> R1
Sources
- Mackie
- J. L. Mackie, Evil and Omnipotence, Mind 64 (1955)
- Theism
- God, if God exists, is omnipotent and wholly good.
The argument
P1 premise
If God exists, God is omnipotent and wholly good.
God → Omnipotent ∧ WhollyGood
Grounded by Theism
P2 premise defeated
An omnipotent, wholly good being would eliminate every evil.
Omnipotent ∧ WhollyGood → ¬Evil
Grounded by Mackie
P3 premise
Evil exists.
Evil
Grounded by Mackie
C1 conclusion defeated
Therefore God does not exist.
¬God
From P1, P2, P3, decided by truth table
Objections and replies
O1 objection to P2 stands
Free will defence (Plantinga, God, Freedom, and Evil, 1974): a world with free creatures who sometimes do wrong may be better than any world without them, and even omnipotence cannot make free creatures always choose well.
R1 reply to O1 answered
Mackie: God could have made creatures who freely always choose the good.
R2 reply to R1
Plantinga: possibly every creature God could create suffers from transworld depravity, so such a world may not be within God's power to actualize.