Criticisms Based on the Concept of Complexity on William Rowe's Evidential Argument

Subject Areas : Philosophy

Received: 2013-06-14 Accepted : 2013-10-23 Published : 2014-02-20

Keywords: Noseeum Inference, Inscrutable Evils, complexity, Complexity of History, Consequential Complexity, Alternative Event, Complex Goods,

Abstract :

Abstract The present paper is intended to examine the two criticisms raised against William Rowe's evidential argument. The common aspect between these two criticisms is that, both of them are built on the concept of "complexity". The first one is Kirk Durston’s, which refers to the complex intertwined historical combination of numerous accidents and events and attempts to prove that ignorance of the good related to some evils is due to the complexity of historical events and it does not mean that such evils are exorbitant as it is stated by William Rowe. The second criticism that, proposed by Daniel Howard Schneider, emphasizes, by expounding the concept of complex good, on the point that the mysteriousness of some good prevents their full recognition by the human cognitive faculty and consequently, would seems as if some of the evils in the world have no good end.

References:

منابع

1. پلانتینگا، آلوین، خدا، اختیار و شرّ، ترجمه محمد سعیدی مهر، قم، مؤسسه فرهنگی طه، 1376ش.

2. Durston, L., “The Consequen.tial Complexity of History and Gratuitous Evil”, Religios Studies, 36, 2000.

3.  Howard-snyder, D., “God, Evil and Suffering”, Murray (ed.), Reason for the Hope Within, 1999, pp. 76-115.

4.  ----------, “Rowe’s Argument from Particular Horrors”, Clark (ed.), Readings in the Philosophy of Religion, 2000, pp 238-49.

5.  Rowe, W., “Evil and Gods Freedom in Creation”, American Philosophical Quarterly 36, 1999, pp.101-13.