Rowe's Argument from Improvability

Philosophical Papers 35 (1):1-25 (2006)
  Copy   BIBTEX


William Rowe has argued that if there is an infinite sequence of improving worlds then an essentially perfectly good being must actualize some world in the sequence and must not actualize any world in the sequence. Since that is impossible, there exist no perfectly good beings. I show that Rowe's argument assumes that the concept of a maximally great being is incoherent. Since we are given no reason to believe that the concept of a maximally great being is incoherent we have no reason to believe Rowe's Argument from Improvability is sound

Author's Profile

Mike Almeida
University of Texas at San Antonio


Added to PP

71 (#62,310)

6 months
26 (#39,333)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?