Can the best arguments for a privation theory of evil be parodied, with equal plausibility, as arguments for a privation theory of good? The privation theory of evil claims that evil has no positive existence, and it is but a privation of good. The privation theory of good claims the opposite. I approach this topic as one element in the so-called evil-God Challenge. Stephen Law has argued that the epistemic support for belief in an omniscient, omnipotent, and morally perfect God (theism) is on a par with the epistemic support for belief in an omniscient, omnipotent, but completely evil-God (maltheism). In fact, he concludes, the arguments for an evil God are symmetrical with, and isomorphic to, those for a good God. The privation theory of evil has often been used to defend theism against the argument from evil. Thus, part of the evil-God Challenge is to evaluate arguments for the privation theory of evil for their vulnerability to maltheist parody. I consider a broad range of arguments for the privation theory of evil, and I argue that most of them are vulnerable to parodic neutralization. Furthermore, I argue that although the thesis of the convertibility of being and goodness is often held to entail the privation theory of evil, or to be entailed by it (or to be equivalent to it), it is independent of the privation theory. I do find that David Oderberg’s recent argument for the privation theory of evil resists any easy maltheist parody, but I argue that it has a defect. I sketch an argument according to which his good-as-fulfillment account is compatible with a perfectly evil god. My tentative conclusion is that the privation theory of evil enjoys little more plausibility than does the privation theory of good.

Jellyfishes have ecological and societal value, but our understanding of taxonomic identity of many jellyfish species remains limited. Here, an approach integrating morphological and molecular (16S ribosomal RNA and cytochrome oxidase I) data enables taxonomic assessment of the blubber jellyfish found in the Philippines. In this study, we aimed to resolve doubt on the taxonomy of Acromitoides purpurus, a valid binomen at the time of our research. Our morphological findings confirm that this jellyfish belongs to the genus Catostylus, and is distinct from known species of the genus inhabiting the Western Pacific, such as Catostylus ouwensi, Catostylus townsendi, and Catostylus mosaicus. Detailed morphological and molecular analyses of the type specimens from the Philippines with the other Catostylus species revive the binomen Catostylus purpurus and invalidate A. purpurus. Genetic analysis also distinguishes this Philippine jellyfish from C. townsendi and C. mosaicus. Through this study, we arranged several Catostylidae taxa into species inquirendae (Catostylus tripterus, Catostylus turgescens, and Acromitoides stiphropterus) and one genus inquirenda (Acromitoides) and provided an identification key for species of Catostylus. This comprehensive study confirms the blubber jellyfish as C. purpurus, enriching our understanding of jellyfish biodiversity. The integration of morphological and genetic analyses proves vital in resolving taxonomic ambiguities within the Catostylidae family and in the accurate identification of scyphozoan jellyfishes.

This study identified 26 late invasive primary surgical site infection (IP-SSI) within 4–12 months of transplantation among 2073 SOT recipients at Duke University Hospital over the period 2015–2019. Thoracic organ transplants accounted for 25 late IP-SSI. Surveillance for late IP-SSI should be maintained for at least one year following transplant.