In the new age the conflict between science and religion has turned into one of the most important apprehensions of believers in God. Employing scientific hypotheses, some of the believers in God have challenged religious beliefs and some others, on the basis of the findings and hypotheses of modern science, have tried to weaken the apologias and theodicies which the believers in God have presented to solve the problem of evil (as one of the most principal philosophical reasons for atheism). By examining modern science in terms of structure, denotation, and method, we will show in this article that the modern science cannot be considered as an argument for atheism. Similarly, by examining the problem of evil in two fields of ethical evil and physical evil – without wishing to judge the believers’ success in presenting apologias and theodicies – we will state that science cannot weaken the apologias and theodicies of the believers in God either in the field of ethical or physical evil and indirectly be considered as a supporter of atheism.
محمدرضایی، محمد (1390)، کلام جدید با رویکرد تطبیقی، قم: دفتر نشر معارف.
محمدی، مجید (1380)، بر بامهای آسمان: مباحثی در دینشناسی تحلیلی، تهران: نشر مرکز.
Caruso, G. (2015) “Free will eliminativism: Reference, error, and phenomenology”. in Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, Vol.172, No. 10, pp. 2823-2833.
Cohon, R. (2018) “Hume's Moral Philosophy”. in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
Darwin, C. (1985), The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dawkins, R. (1995), A River Out of Eden, New York: Basic Books.
Dawkins, R. (2007), The God Delusion, New York: Houghton, Mifflin, Harcourt.
Dawkins, R. (2010), “Universal Darwinism”, in The Nature of Life: Classical and Contemporary Perspectives from Philosophy and Science, Edited by M. Bedau & C. Cleland, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dennett, D. C. (1984), Elbow Room: The Varieties of Free Will Worth Wanting, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gosse, P. (1857), Omphalos; An Attempt to Untie the Geological Knot, London: John Van Voorst.
Guessoum, N. (2014), “Islam and Science”. in The Customization of Science, Edited by S. Fuller, M. Stenmark, U. Zackariasson, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Haught, J. (1990), What Is Religion: An Introduction. New York: Paulist Press.
Himma, K. (2009), “The Free-Will Defence: Evil and the Moral Value of Free Will”, in Religious Studies, Vol. 45, No. 4, pp. 395-415.
Howard-Snyder, D. (2013), “The Logical Problem of Evil: Mackie and Planting”, in The Blackwell Companion to The Problem of Evil, Edited by J. McBrayer, D. Howard-Snyder, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 19-33.
Kitcher, P. (2007), Living with Darwin: Evolution, Design, and the Future of Faith, New York: Oxford University Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1979), “Metaphor and Science”, in Metaphor and Thought, Edited by A. Ortony, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 409-419.
Kurtz, P. (1998), “Darwin Re-Crucified: Why Are So Many Afraid of Naturalism”. in Free Inquiry, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 15-17.
Leibniz, F.G.W (2007) Theodicy. Translated by E. Huggard, Edited by A. Farrer, Charleston: BiblioBazaar.
Lewontin, R. C. (1991), Biology as Ideology: The Doctrine of DNA, Toronto: Anansi.
McKenna, M., & Coates, J. (2018), “Compatibilism”. in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Edited by E. Zalta, URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/compatibilism/>.
Oppy, G. (2013), “Rowe’s Evidential Arguments from Evil”, in The Blackwell Companion to The Problem of Evil, Edited by J. McBrayer, D. Howard-Snyder, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell, pp. 49-66.
Peterson, M. (1998), God and Evil: An Introduction to the Issues, Colorado: Westview Press.
Plantinga, A. (1990), God and Other Minds: A Study of the Rational Justification of Belief in God, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Plantinga, A. (2011), Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism, New York: Oxford University Press.
Ruse, M. (2010), Science and Spirituality: Making Room for Faith in the Age of Science, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ruse, M. (2014), “Atheism and Science”, in The Customization of Science, Edited by S. Fuller, M. Stenmark, U. Zackariasson, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Smart, N. (1969), Philosophers and religious truth. London: S.C.M. Press.
Stenmark, M. (2014), “The Customization of Science: An Introduction to the Debate”, in The Customization of Science, Edited by S. Fuller, M. Stenmark, U. Zackariasson, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Stilwell, P. (2009), “The Status of Methodological Naturalism as Justified by Precedent”, in Liberal Arts and Sciences, No. 41, pp. 229–247.
Van Inwagen, P. (1975), “The Incompatibility of Free Will and Determinism”, in Philosophical Studies: An International Journal for Philosophy in the Analytic Tradition, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 185-199.
Wallace, G. (1971), “The Problems of Moral and Physical Evil”, in Philosophy, Vol. 178, No. 46. pp. 349-351.
Raghebi, K. (2020). The Problem of Evil, Modern Science, and Atheism
“Critical Review of Using Modern Science in Strengthening Atheism”. New Intellectual Research, 5(9), 63-82. doi: 10.22081/nir.2020.55279.1151
MLA
Kazem Raghebi. "The Problem of Evil, Modern Science, and Atheism
“Critical Review of Using Modern Science in Strengthening Atheism”". New Intellectual Research, 5, 9, 2020, 63-82. doi: 10.22081/nir.2020.55279.1151
HARVARD
Raghebi, K. (2020). 'The Problem of Evil, Modern Science, and Atheism
“Critical Review of Using Modern Science in Strengthening Atheism”', New Intellectual Research, 5(9), pp. 63-82. doi: 10.22081/nir.2020.55279.1151
VANCOUVER
Raghebi, K. The Problem of Evil, Modern Science, and Atheism
“Critical Review of Using Modern Science in Strengthening Atheism”. New Intellectual Research, 2020; 5(9): 63-82. doi: 10.22081/nir.2020.55279.1151
)