The Logical Problem of Evil

J. L. Mackie

The argument is valid.

Every inference was checked by machine. Objection O1 stands against P2. So C1 is contested.

Open in the playground

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.