The problem of the distribution of evil and a fluctuating maximal god.

With the goal of explaining the maldistribution of evil in the world, Asha Lancaster-Thomas has recently (2023) expounded upon the idea of a fluctuating maximal God (FMG) that she and others developed (Jeffrey et al. (2020)) from the idea of a maximal God originally proposed by Yujin Nagasawa (2017)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:International Journal for Philosophy of Religion Vol. 96; no. 2; pp. 157 - 166
Autor principal: Patterson, William
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Oct2024
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
Descripción
Sumario:With the goal of explaining the maldistribution of evil in the world, Asha Lancaster-Thomas has recently (2023) expounded upon the idea of a fluctuating maximal God (FMG) that she and others developed (Jeffrey et al. (2020)) from the idea of a maximal God originally proposed by Yujin Nagasawa (2017). Lancaster-Thomas uses this model to answer what I and my co-author, Daniel Linford, have called the problem of geography (Linford and Patterson (2015)). The problem of geography points to the geographically unequal distribution of suffering in the world and argues that this aggravates the original problem of evil (POE) and undermines the primary theodicies offered as solutions to it. I subsequently (2021) added to this problem by pointing out that evil is also maldistributed across race, gender and time. This larger problem may be referred to as the problem of the distribution of evil (PODE). Lancaster-Thomas argues that the FMG, especially under her modified version, is not susceptible to the problem of geography or to temporal inequalities of well-being. In this article I will demonstrate how the FMG, even on Lancaster-Thomas? updated model, fails to undermine either the problem of geography or the more broadly conceived PODE.