Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T02:13:36.204Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Infant suffering revisited

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 December 2001

ANDREW CHIGNELL
Affiliation:
Departments of Philosophy and Religious Studies, PO Box 208287, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06520
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In two recent articles in this journal, David Basinger and Nathan Nobis raise objections to my characterization of infant suffering and the problem that it presents to theism. My main theses were that infant suffering to death is not ‘horrendous’ in the technical sense defined, and that a good God need only balance off rather than ‘defeat’ such suffering. Basinger, on the other hand, claims that some infant suffering should be considered horrendous, while Nobis suggests that such suffering must be defeated by God rather than merely balanced off. In this response I will briefly summarize my view and then respond to Basinger and Nobis.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2001 Cambridge University Press