RE: Perfect, Best of Possible, or Better than Nothing: Which criterion?
May 15, 2015 at 4:20 pm
(This post was last modified: May 15, 2015 at 4:23 pm by Hatshepsut.)
Okay. This one's now different, about the basics of what we should show before we can take omnibenevolence seriously. None of the three kinds of world, perfect, best possible, or better than nothing, itself implies omnibenevolence is operant, only that it's still a contender in the ring. If Pyrrho is correct that we're in a "worse than nothing," then I'm lost. Maybe we would switch to "better than the worst possible world," as many worlds might be worse than none. Or even "the best of all worlds that are worse than nothing."
However, replies to the other (now open) thread should go there & not here, I suppose.
However, replies to the other (now open) thread should go there & not here, I suppose.