The popularity of theodicy over the past several decades has given rise to a countermovement, “anti-theodicy”, which admonishes attempts at theodicy for various reasons. This paper examines one prominent anti-theodical objection: that it is hubristic, and attempts to form an approach to theodicy which evades this objection. To do so I draw from the work of Eleonore Stump, who provides a framework by which we can glean second-personal knowledge of God. From this knowledge, I argue that we can derive a theodicy which does not utilise the kind of analytic theorising anti-theodicists accuse of intellectual hubris.
CITATION STYLE
Balfour, D. (2020). Second-personal theodicy: coming to know why God permits suffering by coming to know God himself. International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, 88(3), 287–305. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11153-020-09763-x
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.