Evidence · Case 06 · Problem of Evil
William Rowe’s fawn and the skeptical theist reply
One exhibit from the free evidence repository at apologetics.pro.
William Rowe framed the strongest version with a fawn dying slowly in a forest fire, suffering no one witnesses or benefits from. The skeptical theist reply, developed by Stephen Wykstra and others, is that our failure to see a point is weak evidence there is none, given how limited our view of the causal web is.
Sources
- Daniel Howard-Snyder, ed., “The Evidential Argument from Evil” (Indiana, 1996). (opens in a new tab)
Collects Rowe’s argument and the main replies.
Objections & responses
- Skeptical theism proves too much. If we cannot judge whether an evil is pointless, we also cannot trust our moral judgments at all, which wrecks ethics and even trust in God’s goodness.
This is the best objection to skeptical theism and it should be granted force. The reply is that being unable to rule out unseen reasons for a specific tragedy is different from being unable to tell right from wrong in ordinary life. We can know that torturing a child is wrong while admitting we cannot map every consequence of every event across history. The Christian does not rest on skeptical theism alone, but pairs it with the cross, where God’s goodness is shown rather than merely argued.