Article examines how combinatorial axiology challenges the probabilistic argument from evil, suggesting limitations in human understanding.
In this article, I argue that the probabilistic argument from evil rests on an assumption that weakens its conclusion. The argument presupposes epistemic conditions that we are not in a position to meet. I use combinatorial axiology to show that the world’s axiological profile is unknowable to humans, and that this fact significantly weakens the probabilistic argument. I do not contend that the probabilistic argument is refuted, but only that the version I address is undercut. To my knowledge, this is the first application of systematic combinatorial axiology against the probabilistic argument.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Elliott R. Crozat (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: