Agnosticism, Skeptical Theism, and Moral Obligation

Abstract

Skeptical theism combines theism with skepticism about one’s capacity to discern God’s morally sufficient reasons for permitting evil. Proponents have claimed that skeptical theism defeats the evidential argument from evil. Many opponents have objected that it implies untenable moral skepticism, induces appalling moral paralysis, and the like. Recently Daniel Howard-Snyder has tried to rebut this prevalent objection to skeptical theism by rebutting it as an objection to the skeptical part of skeptical theism, a part he labels “Agnosticism” (with an intentionally capital “A”). This chapter argues that his rebuttal fails as a defense of Agnosticism against the objection and even more so as a defense of skeptical theism.