Original sentence: For this reason, theodicies tend to be controversial, even among theists.It is common for mathematicians to begin with a proposition that seems to be true (for example Fermat's last theorem) and then work to demonstrate the truth of that proposition through a series of rigorously logical steps.On the other hand, unlike in mathematics, in a philosophical project like a theodicy it is difficult to say what precisely constitutes a valid logical step, and though one proponent of a theodicy may be convinced of its rigor, another person may find it logically weak or reject some of its assumptions.Proceeding from the proposition to be shown to find a proof of that proposition invites confirmation bias on the part of the theorist.Should we respect an inquiry whose goal is not to find out the truth, but to prove by any means possible that a particular thing reasonably doubted (Bayle and all who follow him) is true.Therefore, since it is reasonable to believe that God may exist, theodicy is a reasonable attempt to reconcile the hypothesized existence of God with the perceived existence of evil
Edited sentence: Therefore, since it is reasonable to believe that God exists, theodicy is a reasonable attempt to reconcile the hypothesized existence of God with the perceived existence of evil.Would we accept similarly biased "analyses" from Flat Earth proponents, holocaust revisionists, etc.Would we respect an inquiry whose goal is not to find out the truth, but to prove by any means possible that a particular thing reasonably doubted (Bayle and all who follow him) is true