P.O.E, Cont’d

Kevin Kim continues his discussion of theodicy, here and here.

2 Comments

  1. Kevin Kim says

    Thanks for the shout-out, Malcolm, but with the Vallicella/Hick post, it wasn’t so much about theodicy as it was about what constitutes a religious approach to religion. My feeling was that Dr. V was overgeneralizing from the scholarly perspective.

    Posted June 29, 2010 at 1:05 am | Permalink
  2. Malcolm says

    Right. I threw in the second link right at the end, and was too lazy to explain.

    That was sort of a surprising post by BV. It was a characteristically careful parsing of his own view, but as you say, a surprising generalization.

    Posted June 29, 2010 at 9:33 am | Permalink