Whats the difference between a deductive and inductive argument for the problem of evil?

Question

Please help!!!!
I'm having trouble understanding this, can someone please give me a laymens term account of the difference between an inductive argument from evil and a deductive one?

Answer 1

Holy and Evil are both, terms that are subjective by nature.
They are subject to beliefs. It's extremely difficult to prove
either one unless you have known facts. If you belive and
have faith, well then you can quote the Bible or any other
book of any religion endlessly and you'll never be wrong.
This is what you've read and if you believe what you're
reading is true, all you need to do to prove your point, is
to refer anyone to that book. You are assuming that every-
thing that you've read is true based on the belief that the
writers accounts are true, even though they offer no proof.
That would be your inductive argument.
Your deductive argument can only be proven if you have
known proofs. You take a theory and proceed to solve it
logicly by using known facts. You ask yourself, "Hmm, why
did this happen? Let's see; if this happened, it could only
happen because this other thing happened before it", and
so on. An example to this deducitve prosses is this:
Water can exist in three different states.
Water can exist as a solid if the temperature is 31 degrees
or below. Water freezes at 32 degrees. It's a solid.
Water can exist as a liqiud between 33 and 212 degrees.
After that, water becomes a vapor.
The key to this deductive process is, temperature.
I'm hoping this helped you.

Answer 2

an inductive argument that says that because something happened before, it will happen again. Science is based on induction - conducting experiments over and over with the belief that a repeated result indicates something.

Deductive argumentation goes from premises to conclusions. Logic and philosophy are usually deductive. An example is the problem of evil argument:
-If an all-powerful, all-knowing, good God exists, there would be no evil
-There is evil
-Therefore such a God does not exist.

As for an inductive argument about the problem of evil, I have no clue.

Answer 3

Inductive or deductive reasoning????

not really the issue as both assume -either "a priori" or "a posteori" that there is such a thing as "evil" in the world.

Start your research by google/wiki/ask references to the word "theodicy"...that'll give you a good starting point...

perhaps it would be a more appropriate use of these arguments to question the existence of evil as opposed to the "problem" of evil...

Answer 4

Why don't you try to find the integrals and derivatives of Godhood instead.

luv and SAI RAM,
jk