The problem with evi: : an evidential debate

Abstract

In this thesis I argue that the existence of evil does not provide sufficient evidence that an omnipotent, omniscient and all-loving God does not exist. Specifically, my argument is a contribution to an ongoing debate between William Rowe and Stephen Wykstra. This thesis briefly outlines the history of the development of the evidential version of the problem of evil with its roots in David Hume's writings. It also details the published literature of the debate between Rowe and Wykstra, finally concluding in an argument against Rowe's defeater of Wykstra's CORNEA requirement. I argue that it is not probabilistically surprising that the actual world is a morally deep world, and that this fact precludes Rowe from making his inductive inference.