In this essay, I will argue that the compatibilist definition of free will as a reply to the problem of evil is possible under one condition: suppose that there is no contradiction in the supposition that God is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent, and God creates human who engage in moral evil.
First, I will introduce both compatibilism and libertarianism. Next, I will address the reason Plantinga chose to adopt libertarian conception of free will, instead of the libertarian ones. Furthermore, I will replace Plantinga’s libertarian version with the compatibilist version and explain how the compatibilist version works by simply redefining compatibilism.
In “Free Will and Determinism”, Theodore Sider introduced different perspectives on free will, namely hard determinism, libertarianism and compatibilism. Hard determinists reject free will, whereas libertarians reject determinism. And, compatibilists took believe that determinism and free will can co-exist by redefining free will as “a free action is one that is caused by the person’s beliefs and desires, provided that those beliefs and desires flow from ‘who the person is’.”
…show more content…
On compatibilism, Plantinga would argue that if libertarianism is true, an omnipotent God will create men who were free and never choose to do evil. Therefore, the free will defense against the problem of evil would