Animal Suffering and the Laws of Nature

Two recent atheistic arguments from evil have made much of natural evil and the suffering of animals in their case contra theism. The first argument is that of James Sterba. Sterba’s argument is an incompatibility argument premised on the claim that there are actual events logically incompatible wit...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Jordan, Jeffrey L. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Published: MDPI 2022
In: Religions
Year: 2022, Volume: 13, Issue: 11
Further subjects:B Natural Evil
B problem of evil
B Animal Suffering
B Moral Evil
B incompatibility arguments
B logical problem of evil
Online Access: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Volltext (kostenfrei)

MARC

LEADER 00000naa a22000002 4500
001 1820633152
003 DE-627
005 20221103223717.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 221103s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.3390/rel13111049  |2 doi 
035 |a (DE-627)1820633152 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1820633152 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 0  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |e VerfasserIn  |0 (DE-588)170375943  |0 (DE-627)060457317  |0 (DE-576)131268732  |4 aut  |a Jordan, Jeffrey L. 
109 |a Jordan, Jeffrey L.  |a Jordan, J. L.  |a Jordan, J.  |a Jordan, Jeffrey 
245 1 0 |a Animal Suffering and the Laws of Nature 
264 1 |c 2022 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a Two recent atheistic arguments from evil have made much of natural evil and the suffering of animals in their case contra theism. The first argument is that of James Sterba. Sterba’s argument is an incompatibility argument premised on the claim that there are actual events logically incompatible with the existence of God. The second is that of Michael Tooley, who erects his argument in part on the claim that failing to prevent the suffering of animals cannot be justified by appeals to the great value of regular and predictable laws of nature, nor to the desirability of divine hiddenness. This article examines the arguments of Sterba and Tooley and contends that both are self-undermining. Each of the arguments employs premises that provide reason for thinking that other premises found in their arguments are false. Prior to a discussion of the two arguments, we explore the nature of incompatibility arguments, and examine three assumptions that lurk in the background of discussions of the problem of evil. 
650 4 |a Animal Suffering 
650 4 |a incompatibility arguments 
650 4 |a logical problem of evil 
650 4 |a Moral Evil 
650 4 |a Natural Evil 
650 4 |a problem of evil 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Religions  |d Basel : MDPI, 2010  |g 13(2022), 11, Artikel-ID 1049  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)665435797  |w (DE-600)2620962-7  |w (DE-576)348219067  |x 2077-1444  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:13  |g year:2022  |g number:11  |g elocationid:1049 
856 |u https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/13/11/1049/pdf?version=1668054475  |x unpaywall  |z Vermutlich kostenfreier Zugang  |h publisher [oa journal (via doaj)] 
856 4 0 |u https://doi.org/10.3390/rel13111049  |x Resolving-System  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
856 4 0 |u https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/13/11/1049  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mteo 
936 u w |d 13  |j 2022  |e 11  |i 1049 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 420588446X 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1820633152 
LOK |0 005 20221103052638 
LOK |0 008 221103||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2022-11-02#89998566B62A217EB11614CF17F2EDB33B4E926D 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-Tue135  |c DE-627  |d DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-Tue135 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a ixzs  |a zota 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw 
REL |a 1 
SUB |a REL