Instant Access To 100,000+ Essays!

This paper will discuss the Logical and Evidential Argument from Evil, Peter Wykstra's Unknown Purpose Defense, and William Rowe's rebuttals in an attempt to further progress the argument of God's existence. Epicurus, a Greek philosopher, formulated the Logical Argument from Evil (LAE). This is one of history's earliest accounts of an argument against God's existence. It states: (1) God is omniscient, omnipotent, and omni benevolent. (2) If God is omniscient, then he knows how to prevent evil. (3) If God is omnipotent, then he is able to prevent evil. (4) If God is omni benevolent, then he desires to prevent evil. (5) So, if God exists, there is no evil. (6) But evil exists. (7) Therefore, God does not exist. Since his LAE became known, it has been a hotbed for debate among philosophers. William Rowe, however, came to realize that there is a possibility that a perfect being could permit an evil to allow humans to experience a "greater good", thus causing premise (4) to be false. Human free will is an example many philosophers use as an example of a "greater good". The general argument is that a world where humans are allowed to have a free will but commit moral evils is greater than a world that has no free