Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Philosophy > The Problem Of Evil > Flashcards

The Problem Of Evil Flashcards

1
Q

The problem of evil

A

Uses the the existence of evil in the world to argue against the existence of God

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

The logical problem of evil

A

The existence of God is logically impossible given the existence of evil in the world

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

The evidential problem of evil

A

While it’s possible that God does exist, the amount and way evil is distributed in our world is strong evidence that God does not exist

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Moral evil

A

Evil acts committed by people. E.g. murder, torture, genocide etc

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Natural evil

A

Suffering caused as a result of non human factors- natural processes. E.g. tsunamis, earthquakes etc

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Contradiction

A

A set of beliefs that cannot all be true at the same time. If one is true than the other must be false.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

THE LOGICAL PROBLEM OF EVIL
Mackie’s argument of the inconsistent triad

A
  • God is omnipotent- all powerful
  • God is omnibenevolent- all loving
  • Evil Exists

Mackie’s argument states that only 2 out of the 3 of these can be true.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

If God is omnibenevolent…

A

then He would WANT to stop evil

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

If God is omnipotent…

A

then He is POWERFUL enough to prevent evil

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

BUT evil does exist in the world

A

Either God isn’t powerful enough to prevent the evil, or He doesn’t want to stop evil, or both.
Mackie claims that if there was such a being of omnipotence and omnibenevolence then evil would cease to exist.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

REPLY 1- good can’t exist without evil

A
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Mackie’s response to REPLY 1

A

God could have created a world where there is no evil. We just wouldn’t have the concept of evil. It would still be the case that everything is good- we just wouldn’t be aware of it.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

REPLY 2- the world is better with some evil

A

Developing from REPLY 1, we can argue that some evil is necessary for certain goods. E.g. you couldn’t be courageous without having to overcome fear of pain/death.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

First order goods

A

Pleasure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Second order goods

A

Courage

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

First and Second order goods- relationship

A

Second order goods seek to maximise first order goods. Second order goods are more valuable -> but without first order goods, second order goods couldn’t exist.

17
Q

REPLY 3- evil is necessary for free will

A

Second order evil is necessary for free will. Free will is inherently such a good and valuable thing that it outweighs the bad that results from people abusing free will to do evil things.
Thus, allowing free will bring suffering, but the net good of having free will is greater than if we didn’t. Therefore it is logically possible that an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God would allow evil (both first and second order) for the greater good of free will.

18
Q

Mackie’s response to REPLY 3

A
  • An omnipotent God can create any logically possible world.
  • If it’s logically possible to freely choose to act in a way that is good on one occasion then it is logically possible to choose freely to act in a way that is good on every occasion.
  • So, an omnipotent God could create a world in which everyone freely chooses to act in a way that’s good.
19
Q

PROBLEMS

A

The free will defense
The soul-making theodicy

20
Q

Plantinga- the free will defence

A

Evil is the consequence of the greater good, namely free will

21
Q

Free will (metaphysical freedom)

A

The capacity to choose an action or refrain from taking an action

22
Q

Causal determinism

A

Future events (such as our actions) are caused by, and are an inevitable consequence of, past events, conditions and physical laws

23
Q

Mackie’s criticism

A
  • An omnipotent God can create any logically possible world.
  • If it’s logically possible to freely choose to act in a way that is good on one occasion then it is logically possible to choose freely to act in a way that is good on every occasion.
  • So, an omnipotent God could create a world in which everyone freely chooses to act in a way that’s good.
24
Q

Plantinga’s response to Mackie’s criticism

A

P1. God who is omnipotent, omniscient and supremely good can create significantly free agents, but he cannot cause them to do what is morally right.
P2. A world with significantly free agents contains a greater good than a world containing no significantly creatures at all.
C1. Therefore God created a world in which there exists significantly free agents capable of doing both what is morally good and morally evil.
C2. Therefore the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, supremely good God IS compatible with the existence of evil.

25
Q

What about the existence of natural evil?

A

Plantinga argues natural evil is the result of non-human actors like; Satan, demons etc. Natural evil is just another form of moral evil which its existence can be explained through free will.

Even if this argument doesn’t seem very plausible it is at least possible. Plantinga argues that we only need to show evil is not logically inconsistent with God’s existence to defeat the logical problem of evil.

26
Q

THE EVIDENTIAL PROBLEM OF EVIL

A

We can reject the logical problem of evil, but why would such a God allow so much suffering and to those so undeserving

If God did exist -> less evil and it would be less concentrated on those undeserving.

27
Q

Response to Free will- only explains moral evil

A

While it is logically possible, the lack of empirical evidence, the proponent of the evidential problem of evil can stick to their claim of the distribution of natural evil is strong enough to deny God’s existence.

28
Q

The soul-making theodicy- Hick’s

A

P1. God aims to create a world that will enable free agents to fully develop and grow, morally and spiritually.
P2. A world which free agents are imperfect but grow spiritually and ethically is a greater good than a world that is a safe, pleasurable paradise.
C1. Responding to pain and suffering enables free agents to grow morally and spiritually.
C2. Therefore it is a greater good for God to create a world with pain and suffering (to enable free agents to grow).

29
Q

Hick’s theodicy also accounts for natural evil

A

It is a greater good that there are consistent physical laws than that God is constantly intervening to prevent natural evils, And so, both natural and moral evil have a place in the creation of the world by God.

30
Q

Criticism of Hick

A

The evidential problem of evil sill raises an issue in saying that there is still so much pointless evil (death of children, unequal distribution of suffering). Pointless evil could be removed by God, and humans would still be able to mature, so the existence of pointless evil still counts against the existence of God.

Philosophy (23 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions