Many thanks for your interesting, thoughtful response to JVD,M! 42.
I completely agree that a “no-self” or Buddhist-style, solution to the problem of evil is internally coherent; but I don’t agree that it’s the only, or the best, solution. Obviously, I favor a solution along the lines of the one proposed in the little essay.
But also in my opinion, quite independently of the problem of evil, there are several good necessary-presupposition-style arguments for the existence of an autonomous, rational, enduring real self or real person. E.g., only an autonomous, rational, enduring real self or real person would care about rationally defending a no-self solution to the problem of evil, or care about the general difference between holding a true view or false view in philosophy, & choose to defend what that subject believes is true: hence it’s a necessary presupposition of rationally defending a thesis that the autonomous, rational enduring real subject of that defense really exists in order to care about defending it, and in order to choose to defend the truth of what s/he believes. So I think that some version of the real self/real person view must be true. I do favor a particular version of that view, but this brief response isn’t the place to try to defend it….