The Problem Of Evil Flashcards
(18 cards)
What is the problem of evil
The problem of evil presents a powerful logical challenge to the Gods described by Judaism Christianity and Islam. It goes if there is a God who omnipotence, omniscient and omnibenevolent then why do evil and suffering exist in the world?
Surely a good and loving God would want to prevent evil yet there is clear evidence of evil and suffering in the world
Who is the problem of evil attributed to
is often attributed to the Greek philosopher Epicurus although his writings that have survived do not contain it nevertheless david Hume refers to it in the relation to Epicurus in dialogues concerning Natural religion- ‘is he willing to prevent , but not able? Then he is impotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?’
Who is the best known for the modern version of the argument
The best known modern proponent of the logic form of this argument is J.L Mackie 1917-81
He wrote- ‘the problem of evil, in the sense in which I shall be using the phrase, is a problem only for someone who believes that there is God the who is both omnipotent and wholly good’
What is the inconsistent triad
- God is perfectly good
- God is all powerful
- Evil and suffering exist
The triad is inconsistent because ,it is alleged, we cannot believe all of them at the same time without contradiction and that is where the logical issue lies.
If God is all powerful then he could have made a world with no suffering but he chose not too or was not able too which is inconsistent with the claim that he is omnibenevolent and omnipotent so people conclude that there cannot be an all loving God , all powerful god if evil exists on the ground of logic alone
What is the evidential problem of the problem of evil
takes the evidence of our experience- our own suffering, wrong-doing and loss and that which we experience second hand through reports and other people.
Who is behind the argument of an evil God
is John Stuart mill where he argues that the natural world is full of evidence of evil and he gives powerful examples of ways in which people and animals suffer. He argues against those who use posteriori arguments in support of existence of a good god by saying that the evidence does not point to an omnibenevolent creator but if it points to one it would be one who is sadistic.
• Mills argument is that the evidence shows that the belief in a loving and all powerful creator is not supported. He is arguing against supporters of teleological arguments such as William paley who claimed that we only need to Look at the world around us to conclude that it must have been made by the power of a God who cares about us but mills argues that the evidence shows nothing of the kind.
What is the Augustine theodicy
disagreed with Plato that everything in the physical world was an Imperfect reflection of the ideal forms. As he was a Christian he didn’t believe that God could create anything imperfect Especially since the bible confirmed how perfect everything created was.
When faced with the problem of evil he came to the conclusion that evil is not a real actual quality in its own right. It is what he called a privatio boni.- a privation (lack) of the good. He believed evil was a falling away from goodness like how a shadow falls when one moves further away from a source of light
How did Augustine believe evil first came into the world
through the ‘fall’ of the angels . He said that the angels were all created perfect but that some received less grace then others as part of the variety of things things. The angels then fell away from God as a direct result of their misuse of free will. This was repeated in the fall of Adam and Eve when they were tempted by Satan (the chief of the fallen angels) . All the evil in the world Augustine thought followed on from here.
In Augustine own words in his ‘confessions’ – ‘free will is the cause of our doing evil’ Adam and eves act of disobedience, mirroring the disobedience of some of the angels was so terrible that it disrupted the whole world in a cosmic scale for all the generations that followed. It even affected the natural world, causing earthquakes, droughts and plagues – everything wrong with the world could be traced back to the failure of the angels to do their duty in worshipping God.
Strength of Augustine theodicy
never suggests that God in any way tolerates evil , or wants to have a world with evil in it. – he never allows the idea of God wanting any evil which sticks to the traditional attributes of God
Weaknesses of Augustine theodicy
• However evil seems to be more serious than a ‘privato boni’ eg deliberate cruelty towards a child or animal seems to be much more powerful and harmful than just a lack of a goodness on the tormentors part.
• Augustines view also gives us no explanation of why God gave some Angels too little grace where it caused them to rebel. Even if we accept the idea that variety is a good thing there was no need for that to include angels with little willpower. The theodicy seems to suggest that God did not think ahead.
• Even if we do accept that evil is no more than a lack of perfection this still does not explain why God allowed this lack of perfection into the world in the first place. Friedrich schleiermacher argued coherently against this part of Augustine theodicy by saying that it is impossible to find a cause or motive for the Angels to sin unless they were created imperfectly in the first place. Evil would have had to come into the world out of nowhere unless God made it and if it did come out of nowhere then this raises some serious issues for the notion of Gods omniscient and power
• His theodicy also raises Important questions about the nature of Gods omniscience – if God knows everything in the sense he can see into the future and knows what we will do then why did he create the world knowing we will use our free will to freely choose sin. Even If the choice to sin was ours, god still made the choice to create the world knowing what would happen and could be blamed for that choice
What is the theodicy of Irenaeus
o Irenaeus did not attempt to show that evil and suffering do not really exist and he admitted that God seems to allow them to continue. His argument was that God allows evil and suffering to have a place in the world and that the world was deliberately created with a mixture of goodness and evil so that we can develop and grow as human beings into a mature and free relationship with God
o He argued that there had to be evil in the world for us to be able to appreciate the good
o He also argued that we have to have evil in the world in order for us to develop as free individuals who make there own moral decisions and are responsible for them. If everything went our way then we would never learn anything. We grow as individuals through tackling problems, making mistakes, persevering and being patient.
Who was Irenaeus
Irenaeus lived earlier than Augustine from about 139-202AD. He lived at a time where Christianity was still very new and he helped to form the New Testament with his opinions of which writings genuinely deserved to be in the bible. The persecution of Christians was going on at this time so the problem of evil was talked about at the time
What did Richard Swinburne and John hick and Irenaeus say
o According to Irenaeus and others such as John hick and Richard Swinburne who have developed there own Irenaeus theodicies, when God made us in his ‘image’ this had to include giving them free will. They had to have like God the freedom to make their own choices. If God had not created us with free will then we would not have been in his image, and wld be like puppets
o Overall he believes that evil is a necessary result of having the freedom to choose like how immanual Kant said we only act morally if we have the freedom of choice
What is John Hicks Irenaean ‘soul-making theodicy’
o John Hick 1922-2012 he took a similar approach to that of Irenaeus, arguing that if we never experienced any difficulties or challenges, we would not be able to grow as personalities, we would not learn anything morally – ‘a world which is to be a person making environment cannot be a pain free paradise’
What did John hick argue
o Hick described the the world as a ‘vale of soul making’ where things happen to us for our own good. He borrowed these words from the poet John Keats where he went through so much suffering in order for his soul to be made fit for meeting God after death
o Hick took this idea of ‘soul making’ and developed Irenaeus theodicy in a way he hoped would appeal to the 20th century mind. By hicks lifetime most people had accepted Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution meaning many rejected Augustine approach which necessitated the belief of Adam and Eve and the fall. Hick too rejected the Augustine theodicy as for him it was incompatible with modern science.
o Hick argued that evil and suffering in this world are not unfortunate accidents that God failed to anticipate nor are they problems which God wishes he could resolve for us but to him god deliberately gave us a world in which we would have the best circumstances under which to choose a free and loving relationship with him. This includes struggles and hardships known as ‘epistemic distance’.
o This means a distance in knowledge. In hicks view God deliberately chooses to remain partially hidden from humanity and has evil and suffering so that we can make genuinely free choices about whether to believe him or not. If he presented himself fully then There would be no faith.
o The world then has to contain both good and evil if there is uncertainty about God
o However his theodicy depends on the belief in life after death. Hardships can only be justified if there is a promise of better things to come and the world is preparing our souls for a better existence ahead
o If someone dies young after a long painful illness then it is because there is better things to come in the after life so Hicks theodicy relies on there being an afterlife
Strengths of John hick
• Very influential amongst Christians – when faced with suffering they will respond by saying that God knows what he is doing and that good will come out of the situation even though it is very difficult to bear at the time
Weaknesses of John hick
• Some people suffer a lot more than others – does this mean God wants some people to go through spiritual maturity but does not for the people living peaceful content lives.
• Some people are also unable to benefit from suffering but still experience it eg a tiny premature baby might have a painful infection and is not capable of gaining new insights from this experience
• Animal suffering to is hard to explain where If it is to help humans learn it also doesn’t make sense that animals suffer when no humans are around to learn lessons by witnessing it
• Some people seem to be made worst by there suffering – not always teach valuable lessons but can make them lose faith and become bitter or even drive them towards mental illness where they can no longer thing and act rationally
• Hick was of the view that human freedom is so important that it is worth paying the price of natural and moral evil in order to have it . However for some people even if the suffering is worthwhile in terms of lessons , it would still have been better if God never made the world. Dostoevsky presented the argument that the price we are expected to pay for our free will is too high eg the torture of a child
• Hick took a consequentialist view – gods uses might be unpleasant but they are justified by the ends( which are our freedom and better shaped souls) however this can be criticised by Kant with his fundamental principle that humans should not be used as a means to an end but if hick is right it would appear that god does this when he allows suffering so other people can learn
• D.Z. Phillips argued against Hick where that if God would allow this suffering then he would be an evil God if he was prepared to let so many people suffer
Is it possible to defend monotheism successfully in the face of evil
Yes - more evidence that a good god does exist as there is good beauty and love which outweighs the bad
Yes - we should not expect to understand god and the things he does
