4. A Description of an Ideal Debate about the Existence of God
Let us imagine that we are about to watch part of a debate between an atheist (“Atheist”)
and a theist (“Theist”) about whether there is a God. This debate is
end p.192
being carried on before an audience of agnostics. As we enter the debating hall (the
debate has evidently been going on for some time), Atheist has the floor. She is trying to
convince the agnostics to abandon their agnosticism and become atheists like herself.
Theist is not, not in this part of the debate anyway, trying to convert the agnostics to
theism. At present, he is trying to convince the agnostics of only one thing: that Atheist's
arguments should not convert them to atheism. (By an odd coincidence, we have arrived
just at the moment at which Atheist is beginning to set out the argument from evil.) I
mean these fictional characters to be ideal types, ideal representatives of the categories
“atheist,” “theist,” and “agnostic”: they are all highly intelligent, rational, and factually
well informed; they are indefatigable speakers and listeners, and their attention never
wanders from the point at issue. The agnostics, in particular, are moved by a passionate
desire for truth. They want to get the question of the existence of God settled, and they
don't at all care which way it gets settled. Their only desire is—if this should be
possible—to leave the hall with a correct belief about the existence of God, a belief they
have good reason to regard as correct. (They recognize, however, that this may very well
not be possible, in which case they intend to remain agnostics.) Our two debaters, be it
noted, are not interested in changing each other's beliefs. Each is interested in the effects
his or her arguments will have on the beliefs of the agnostics and not at all in the effects
those arguments will have on the beliefs of the other debater. One important consequence
of this is that neither debater will bother to consider the question, Will my opponent
accept this premise? Each will consider only the question, Will the agnostics accept this
premise?
Can Atheist use the argument from evil to convert these ideal “theologically neutral”
agnostics to atheism—in the face of Theist's best efforts to block her attempt to convince
them of the truth of atheism? Our examination of the argument from evil will be
presented as an attempt to answer this question.
5. Atheist's Initial Statement of the Argument from Evil; Theist
Begins His Reply by Making a Point about Reasons
Atheist, as I have said, is beginning to present the argument from evil to the audience of
agnostics. Here is her initial formulation of the argument:
end p.193