While the conclusion logically follows the premises, the argument is not sound because the premise, “All humans are 8 feet tall” is not true. To illustrate, this argument is valid: All humans are 8 feet tall Andrew is a human therefore, Andrew is 8 feet tall.

Soundness, on the other hand, occurs when an argument is both valid and true. When a philosopher proclaims a logical proof to be valid, one merely professes that the conclusion proceeds from the set of premises. Before I continue, it is important to pause for a second to explain the use of “sound” and “valid”. He begins by simply questioning the soundness of the atheist’s set of premises. Plantinga commences by immediately evaluating the problem of evil. Without such proof, the conclusion, “God does not exist,” stands.Īlvin Plantinga’s God, Freedom, and Evil begins by deconstructing this well-known proof it ends with a reconstruction of a natural theological proof for the existence of God. In order to prove the existence of God, then, one must prove the falseness surrounding any of the argument’s premises. This proof, known as the problem of evil, is logically valid, meaning that its premises lead to its conclusion. Logically, therefore, we must conclude that God does not exist. Given this definition, God ought to hate evil and possess the power to eradicate it from the universe. Suppose that God, as most Christians believe, is wholly good, all-knowing, all-powerful, and ever-present. One note: Do not try to read an electronic version! The constant referring backward to numbered arguments will be very frustrating without a paper copy. Plantinga’s argument against the problem of evil is fascinating yet unsatisfying, and his discussion of the ontological argument is equally fun but equally unconvincing … like one of those puzzles where you know there’s something wrong and can’t quite place your finger on it. In the second half, Plantinga briefly introduces the Cosmological Argument and the Teleological Argument, and then spends the rest of the book on the Ontological Argument. Thus half of the book presents a case against God and half attempts to prove he exists. He spends half the book discussing the problem of evil, and the other half on natural theology.

It’s is an excursion into the joy of logic … for the fun of it, not necessarily to reach any meaningful conclusions. Philosophical reflection, Plantinga assures us, is not that different than just thinking hard. This is an introduction to philosophical apologetics, a short little book that can be read in a couple hours, and understood in five or six hours. I’m secure in my status as a religion nerd, so I’ll admit I loved it. How do I rate a book that will bore most of you but titillate the rest? Half way between two stars and six stars, I guess.

God freedom and evil by alvin plantinga