Bibliographic record
Abstract
In his 1955 article "Evil and Omnipotence" J.L. Mackie argues that all the main solutions to the problem of evil involve logical contradictions. His objection to the free will defence has been particularly influential. The free will defence maintains that all evil is due to the immoral, free choices made either by human beings or by other fallen beings, such as fallen angels, which are necessary to explain the existence of natural evil. According to this defence, it is good that God creates free beings, but immoral of them to misuse their freedom; therefore, God is not responsible for the evils that result. Mackie contends that this defence discounts the logical possibility of God creating free beings who would use their freedom always to choose the good. After all, if some people can manage to do this at least some of the time, why should not God have created a world in which people managed to do this all the time? In other words, God should have created this logically possible world of freedom and perfect goodness, instead of our world of freedom and evil.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".