On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se...
Stephen Law is a philosopher and author. Currently Director of Philosophy and Cert HE at Oxford University Department of Continuing Education. Stephen has also published many popular books including The Philosophy Gym, The Complete Philosophy Files, and Believing Bullshit. For school talks/ media: stephenlaw4schools.blogspot.co.uk Email: think-AT-royalinstitutephilosophy.org
http://365daysofphilosophy.libsyn.com/rss
Download audio here: January – Interview With Stephen Law
Stephen Law (BA, BPhil, DPhil) is a philosopher and senior lecturer at Heythrop College in the University of London. He also edits the philosophical journal Think, which is published by the Royal Institute of Philosophy and aimed at the general public.
Professor Law is the author of a number of books, including The Philosophy Files, The Outer Limits, A Very Short Introduction To Humanism, The War For Children’s Minds and Believing Bullshit. He is also the Provost for the Centre for Inquiry, UK. He blogs at Stephen Law and Believing Bullshit, and uses Twitter at https://twitter.com/stephenlaw60.
For this interview, I opened with a question that my students always had about his career – how and why did he get into philosophy in the first place (particularly as an adult student at the age of 24)? We discuss humanism, atheism, debates about the existence of god, philosophy for all ages - and, of course (as it is Week Two), arguments… and how do you know when is it worth arguing in the first place?