Horrendous Evil and the Loving God: A Reply to Joshua Thurow

Andrew Gleeson

doi:10.1007/s11841-021-00883-z

Horrendous Evil and the Loving God: A Reply to Joshua Thurow

Andrew Gleeson

College of Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

Marilyn McCord Adams has defended theodicy by appeal to the idea of post-mortem compensation for the victims of horrendous evil. I have argued that this overlooks the dissociation of theodicy from moral reality that she concedes in her response to criticism of theodicy by D Z Phillips. Joshua Thurow has recently defended Adams against my argument. Here I defend and strengthen that argument against Thurow.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	419-428
Number of pages	10
Journal	Sophia: International Journal For Philosophy of Religion, Metaphysical Theology and Ethics
Volume	61
Issue number	2
Early online date	4 Nov 2021
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s11841-021-00883-z
Publication status	Published - Jun 2022

Keywords

Theodicy
Horrendous evils
Greater goods
Adams
Thurow
Compensation

Access to Document

10.1007/s11841-021-00883-zLicence: In Copyright

Cite this

@article{69f1a1d7356a443bb86f5875f56e3009,

title = "Horrendous Evil and the Loving God: A Reply to Joshua Thurow",

abstract = "Marilyn McCord Adams has defended theodicy by appeal to the idea of post-mortem compensation for the victims of horrendous evil. I have argued that this overlooks the dissociation of theodicy from moral reality that she concedes in her response to criticism of theodicy by D Z Phillips. Joshua Thurow has recently defended Adams against my argument. Here I defend and strengthen that argument against Thurow.",

keywords = "Theodicy, Horrendous evils, Greater goods, Adams, Thurow, Compensation",

author = "Andrew Gleeson",

year = "2022",

month = jun,

doi = "10.1007/s11841-021-00883-z",

language = "English",

volume = "61",

pages = "419--428",

journal = "Sophia: International Journal For Philosophy of Religion, Metaphysical Theology and Ethics",

issn = "0038-1527",

number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Horrendous Evil and the Loving God

T2 - A Reply to Joshua Thurow

AU - Gleeson, Andrew

PY - 2022/6

Y1 - 2022/6

N2 - Marilyn McCord Adams has defended theodicy by appeal to the idea of post-mortem compensation for the victims of horrendous evil. I have argued that this overlooks the dissociation of theodicy from moral reality that she concedes in her response to criticism of theodicy by D Z Phillips. Joshua Thurow has recently defended Adams against my argument. Here I defend and strengthen that argument against Thurow.

AB - Marilyn McCord Adams has defended theodicy by appeal to the idea of post-mortem compensation for the victims of horrendous evil. I have argued that this overlooks the dissociation of theodicy from moral reality that she concedes in her response to criticism of theodicy by D Z Phillips. Joshua Thurow has recently defended Adams against my argument. Here I defend and strengthen that argument against Thurow.

KW - Theodicy

KW - Horrendous evils

KW - Greater goods

KW - Adams

KW - Thurow

KW - Compensation

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85118533865&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11841-021-00883-z

DO - 10.1007/s11841-021-00883-z

M3 - Article

VL - 61

SP - 419

EP - 428

JO - Sophia: International Journal For Philosophy of Religion, Metaphysical Theology and Ethics

JF - Sophia: International Journal For Philosophy of Religion, Metaphysical Theology and Ethics

SN - 0038-1527

IS - 2

ER -

Horrendous Evil and the Loving God: A Reply to Joshua Thurow

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this