“Does the problem of evil demonstrate that an all-powerful all-good God does not exist?”  <– question for the term paper

paper HAS TO BE BASED on readings from 7.5 in the textbook Chaffee, “The Philosopher’s Way: Thinking Critically about Profound Ideas” 5th edition. 

note from professor on original paper — “This paper doesn’t really do what the prompt asked, and so I would recommend a full rewrite. You need to have a clear thesis and provide an argument for it, then consider an objection and respond to that objection. Your paper also needed to focus on the assigned course readings. There is no discussion of the course readings at all here, and the although this paper covers many things, none of the arguments are actually explained in depth.

If you choose to write on this topic, your paper needs to be focused on explaining some or all of the assigned course readings on this topic, which were found in the 7.5 selection of the book. These readings are by Mackie, Hick, and Madden and Hare, and were only about the logical problem of evil.”

Along with the basic general paper elements included in the rubric, your paper must contain the following content:

A CLEAR THESIS 

An ARGUEMENT or ARGUMENTS in support of your thesis

A potential OBJECTION to the claim made in your thesis (You MUST consider the relevant objections in the course readings)

A RESPONSE CLEAR TO THAT OBJECTION that is consistent with and makes sense given your original argument for your thesis (but does not simply restate the same argument)

It is acceptable for your argument and the objection you consider to be a clear explanation of a philosopher’s argument—you do not need to come up with your own unique argument (your thesis, for example, could say, “Following Mackie, I will argue that the problem of evil shows that the traditional monotheistic God does not exist…”). Do NOT rely on quotations for your argument–instead, you should explain the author’s argument in your own words. If you use quotations, you must fully explain what the author is saying and explain how it support your argument.

If you use a philosopher we did not read for class, you must cite from an original philosophical source (rather than a summary article, for example). It’s also your responsibility to make sure the author is a credible academic and the article is published. Make sure you do not plagiarize–any instances of plagiarism will result in a 0. 

SEE ORIGINAL PAPER ATTACHED BELOW