The Privation Theory of Evil; Challenges and Responses

Q: How can I download an article?

To download an article from SID, first log in to the site, search for the article title, and click on the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I download an ISI article?

To download an ISI article on SID, enter the keyword or article title in the search bar, view the relevant results, click on the desired article, and select the 'Download Article' option.

Q: How can I access the SID database?

To access the SID database, visit SID.ir, create an account, and log in to access scientific resources.

Q: Is downloading articles from SID free?

Some articles on SID are available for free, while others require payment. Details are specified on the article's page.

Rafati Fatima; Saedimehr Mohammad

Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Journal Paper

Paper Information

Journal: JOSTARHA-YE FALSAFE-YE DIN (PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION STUDIES ) Year:2019 | Volume:8 | Issue:1 Page(s): 105-127

Download Full-Text

مرکز اطلاعات علمی Scientific Information Database (SID) - Trusted Source for Research and Academic Resources

Persian Verion

View:

491

Download:

Cites:

Information Journal Paper

Title

The Privation Theory of Evil; Challenges and Responses

Author(s)

Rafati Fatima | Saedimehr Mohammad | Issue Writer Certificate

Keywords

The Privation Theory of EvilQ1

painQ1

Moral EvilQ2

AugustineQ2

AquinasQ1

Abstract

The Privation Theory of Evil (PT) is a general theory about the nature of evil according to which all kinds of evil have a privative (or negative) nature. During the Middle Ages some great philosopher-theologians such as Augustine and Aquinas endorsed (PT). After being neglected for a long time, recently philosophers of religion have shown interest (PT). In this paper, after a brief review of Augustine’ s and Aquinas’ views, we first provide a comprehensive sketch of (PT). Then we examine some of the arguments proposed in favour of (PT) and show that they are not conclusive. Then we discuss two counterexamples proposed by the opponents of (PT), namely pain and Moral Evil. First, we investigate and critique the views of the two sides and then we argue that the main deficiency of the current debate is the philosophers of religion don’ t utilities the relevant theories of philosophy of mind and ethics to illustrate their philosophical grounds. Without clarification of these grounds any well-based judgment about (PT) seems to be impossible.

Cites

No record.

References

No record.

Cite

APA: Copy

Rafati, Fatima, & Saedimehr, Mohammad. (2019). The Privation Theory of Evil; Challenges and Responses. JOSTARHA-YE FALSAFE-YE DIN (PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION STUDIES ), 8(1 ), 105-127. SID. https://sid.ir/paper/396406/en

Vancouver: Copy

Rafati Fatima, Saedimehr Mohammad. The Privation Theory of Evil; Challenges and Responses. JOSTARHA-YE FALSAFE-YE DIN (PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION STUDIES )[Internet]. 2019;8(1 ):105-127. Available from: https://sid.ir/paper/396406/en

IEEE: Copy

Fatima Rafati, and Mohammad Saedimehr, “The Privation Theory of Evil; Challenges and Responses,” JOSTARHA-YE FALSAFE-YE DIN (PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION STUDIES ), vol. 8, no. 1 , pp. 105–127, 2019, [Online]. Available: https://sid.ir/paper/396406/en

Related Journal Papers