Rowe and The Problem of Evil

Unnecessary Evil and Friendly Atheism

Note: Two senses of 'atheism'

  1. The argument FOR Atheism:

    1. Knowledge verses rational belief -

      1. knowledge = true justified belief

      2. rational = justified belief

    2. It is rational to believe that there is unnecessary, preventable evil.

  2. A defense of Theism:

    1. The "Direct Attack" - evil is necessary and/or unpreventable

    2. The "Indirect Attack" - it is more rational to believe that God exists than to believe evil is unnecessary and preventable:

      The Atheist's Argument:

      • P1. Unnecessary, preventable evil exists.
      • P2. If God exists, God would not allow unnecessary preventable evil.
      • C. God does not exist.

      The Theist's Argument:

      • P1. God exists
      • P2. If God exists, God would not allow unnecessary preventable evil.
      • C. Unnecessary, preventable evil does not exist.

  3. Responses to Theism:

    1. Unfriendly Atheism - there are no rational grounds for the theist's beliefs

    2. Indifferent Atheism - the atheist doesn't care if there are rational grounds for the theist's beliefs

    3. Friendly Atheism - there may be rational grounds for the theist's beliefs

    4. The Paradox of Friendly Atheism - how can the atheist accept the theist's view as rational if it rests on beliefs the atheist thinks are irrational?

Return to Notes Index
Return to Barry's HP