Reference no: EM133413461

Question: how Louise Antony lays out her Evidential Argument from Suffering: No morally good being would fail to prevent suffering if he or she were able to prevent it, unless he or she had a good reason to permit it. An omnipotent being would always be able to prevent suffering. Probably, there is no good reason that a morally good, omnipotent being could have for failing to prevent suffering. Thus: If there were a morally good, omnipotent being, then probably there would be no suffering. There is suffering. Thus: Probably there is no being who is both morally good an omnipotent. Is Antony's argument sound? Perhaps you have changed your mind after the discussion, or perhaps you still have the same ultimate opinion about her argument, but you have a better understanding of why you think her argument is sound or unsound. For this assignment, offer your evaluation of whether Antony's argument is sound.