What is the Noseeum inference?
What is the Noseeum inference?
The “noseeum” inference (The reason NI is called a ‘noseeum’ inference is that it says, more or less, that because we don’t see ‘um, they probably ain’t there.) Various analogies are offered to show that the noseeum inference is logically dubious.
What is the objection to skeptical theism?
Skeptical theism is a leading response to the evidential argument from evil against the existence of God. A well-known objection to skeptical theism is that it opens up a skeptical Pandora’s box, generating implausibly wide-ranging forms of skepticism, including skepticism about the external world and past.
What is unjustified evil?
If there is unjustified evil (evil which God has no good reason to allow), God does not exist.
What is logical problem of evil?
The logical problem of evil claims that God’s omnipotence, omniscience and supreme goodness would completely rule out the possibility of evil and that the existence of evil would do the same for the existence of a supreme being.
What is the difference between deist and theist?
A theist believes there is a God who made and governs all creation; but does not believe in the doctrine of the Trinity, nor in a divine revelation. A deist believes there is a God who created all things, but does not believe in His superintendence and government.
What is the free will defense in philosophy?
The free will defense solves the problem of evil by claiming that creatures have power to exert freely some control over their circumstances. Creatures can use freedom for good or evil; evil results from improper creaturely use of freedom.
Why is it called noseeum inference?
This is an example of a kind of inference that has come to be called the “Noseeum Inference” after the bugs in the Midwest which are so small one never seems to find them in one’s tent, even when one knows they’re there (Wykstra 1996). Here is why that name has been applied.
Does skeptical theism undermine the argument from evil?
If skeptical theism is true, it appears to undercut the primary argument for atheism, namely the argument from evil. This is because skeptical theism provides a reason to be skeptical of a crucial premise in the argument from evil, namely the premise that asserts that at least some of the evils in our world are gratuitous.
What is a fair way to represent inference?
A fair way to represent the inference is as a kind of simple induction of the sampling variety concerning some given terrible evil E. Premise: All possible reasons examined for allowing E so far have turned out to be insufficient to justify God permitting them. Conclusion: There is no justification for E.
Is Rowe’s inference unsound?
To justify this conclusion, the skeptical theist argues that the limits of human cognitive faculties are grounds for skepticism about our ability to draw conclusions about God’s motives or lack of motives; it is therefore reasonable to doubt the second premise. Bergmann and Rae thus concluded that Rowe’s inference is unsound.
