An argument proposed by atheist philosopher Sobel. He outlines this argument as follows. P1. This is not the best possible world.P2. That the world is not the best possible world is incompatible with a perfect being.C. There does not exist a perfect being. I would like to focus on Premise 2 of this argument because it is also an important part of standard formulations of the Problem of Evil. Is a Perfect World a Coherent Concept? Let's start with a thought experiment. Imagine there is a perfect baker who can create any cake that is good and no cake that is bad. He has been tasked with creating cakes to commemorate several different events in a single day. The first event is a wedding, the second is a birthday, the third is a graduation and the fourth is a funeral. If there were a single, perfect cake, then the baker could create a single cake that would perfectly satisfy all
attendees. But is this conceivable? Isn't part of what makes a cake valuable to the celebrants the uniqueness of the cake, the cake being specific and personalized. Does the existence of a cake that is not perfect for their occasion but perfect for another mean that the baker is imperfect (he did, after all, create an imperfect cake with respect to the preferences of 3/4 parties)? It seems to me that the perfect baker would create cakes that are appropriate for each occasion. But we can take this even further... Is the Perfection of which Sobel Speaks an Objective or Subjective Perfection? Imagine again the perfect baker. Today he is tasked with merely creating a single cake for a wedding. Is it reasonable to think that the perfect baker can create a cake that satisfies to perfection the appetites of all of the attendees? It seems that this request is reasonable iff the preferences of all attendees is compatible. I…