A Modified Free-Will Defense
A Structural and Theistic Free-Will Defense as a Response to James Sterba
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 16901636 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Elif Nur Balci (0000-0002-8993-3522, Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 13 |
| Issue | 8 |
| Pages | 700 |
| Publication date | 2022-07-29 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Religions (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 2077-1444 • E-ISSN: 2077-1444 |
| Publisher | MDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT) |
| DOI | 10.3390/rel13080700 |
| OpenAlex | W4289205506 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 8 |
In his book Is a Good God Logically Possible?, James Sterba argues that the Plantingian free-will defense, which reconciles the existence of a good and omnipotent God with the existence of evil, is a failed argument when it comes to the terrible evils in the world. This study discusses that Sterba’s claim is invalid when Plantinga’s free-will defense is modified with a structural perspective. In order to reconcile the structural and inevitable possibility of evil with God’s moral imperatives, a structural free-will defense was complemented by an Islamic moral theology that Mu’tazila and its great scholar Qādi Abd al-Jabbar advanced. Such a modified free-will defense can show that the existence of all evil, including terrible ones, is still compatible with a good and omnipotent God
Epistemology · Free will · Law and economics · Political science · Self defense · Sociology · Theism · Theology · Free Will and Agency · Law · Medieval and Classical Philosophy · Philosophy · War, Ethics, and Justification
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,25 |
| Citation span | 2022 - 2025 (4) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |