God, Horrors, and Our Deepest Good

IF 0.4 0 PHILOSOPHY Faith and Philosophy Pub Date : 2020-01-01 DOI:10.37977/faithphil.2020.37.1.4
Bruce Langtry
{"title":"God, Horrors, and Our Deepest Good","authors":"Bruce Langtry","doi":"10.37977/faithphil.2020.37.1.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"J.L. Schellenberg argues that since God, if God exists, possesses both full knowledge by acquaintance of horrific suffering and also infinite compassion, the occurrence of horrific suffering is metaphysically incompatible with the existence of God. In this paper I begin by raising doubts about Schellenberg’s assumptions about divine knowledge by acquaintance and infinite compassion. I then focus on Schellenberg’s claim that necessarily, if God exists and the deepest good of finite persons is unsurpassably great and can be achieved without horrific suffering, then no instances of horrific suffering bring about an improvement great enough to outweigh their great disvalue. I argue that there is no good reason, all things considered, to believe this claim. Thus Schellenberg’s argument from horrors fails.","PeriodicalId":45294,"journal":{"name":"Faith and Philosophy","volume":"11 1","pages":"77-95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Faith and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37977/faithphil.2020.37.1.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

J.L. Schellenberg argues that since God, if God exists, possesses both full knowledge by acquaintance of horrific suffering and also infinite compassion, the occurrence of horrific suffering is metaphysically incompatible with the existence of God. In this paper I begin by raising doubts about Schellenberg’s assumptions about divine knowledge by acquaintance and infinite compassion. I then focus on Schellenberg’s claim that necessarily, if God exists and the deepest good of finite persons is unsurpassably great and can be achieved without horrific suffering, then no instances of horrific suffering bring about an improvement great enough to outweigh their great disvalue. I argue that there is no good reason, all things considered, to believe this claim. Thus Schellenberg’s argument from horrors fails.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
上帝、恐怖和我们最深的善
J.L.谢伦伯格认为,既然上帝——如果上帝存在的话——既熟知可怕的痛苦,又拥有无限的同情,那么可怕的痛苦的发生在形而上学上与上帝的存在是不相容的。在本文中,我首先对谢伦伯格关于通过认识和无限同情获得神圣知识的假设提出质疑。然后我把重点放在谢伦伯格的主张上,如果上帝存在,并且有限的人的最深的善是无与伦比的伟大,可以在没有可怕的痛苦的情况下实现,那么没有可怕的痛苦的实例带来的进步足以抵消他们的巨大的不价值。我认为,考虑到所有的事情,没有充分的理由相信这种说法。因此,谢伦伯格的恐怖论是失败的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Heavenly Procreation The Value of a Meaningful Life as a Response to the Problem of Evil Luis R.G. Oliveira and Kevin J. Corcoran, eds., Common Sense Metaphysics: Essays in Honor of Lynne Rudder Baker Tobias Hoffmann, Free Will and the Rebel Angels in Medieval Philosophy Reading Anselm's Natural Theology Through a Palamite Lens
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1