2A Problem of Evil and Suffering Flashcards
What is evil?
Anything that causes suffering
What is moral evil? Give three examples.
- Suffering brought about through the actions of a free will-agent.
- Murder, rape, terrorism
What is natural evil? Give three examples.
- Suffering brought about through events outside of the control of free-will agents; most commonly occurring as part of the natural order.
- Earthquake, tsunami, disease
Why is evil a challenge to the God of Classical Theism? (Basic answer)
- Followers believe in an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving creator of the universe, but evil does not fit comfortably with human experience.
- Why does creation suffer appalling extremes if God has these qualities?
Who is associated with the classical problem of evil? Give a quote from him.
- Epicurus.
* “If he wants to, but cannot, he is impotent. If he can, but does not want to, he is wicked.”
What are the three components to the inconsistent triad?
• Omnipotence, omnibenevolence, evil exists: logically inconsistent for all three statements to exist simultaneously
Who is the inconsistent triad associated with?
John L. Mackie
Triad: If God was omnipotent, he…
- Would have the power to remove evil
- Could have created a world w/o evil
- Would have “unqualified omnipotence”, incorporating omniscience: omnipotence w/o any restrictions due to constraints of the world
Triad: If God was omnibenevolent, he…
- Would remove evil so that creation does not suffer
* Idea that he would tolerate evil/suffering = anathema to concept of omnibenevolence
Triad: Does evil exist?
• Existence is so tangible in its effect and scope that any denial of its existence would be nonsensical
What is a possible solution to the inconsitent triad?
Remove one of the three points.
Triad: What are the effects of removing omnipotence?
- He wants to remove evil but does not have the power, ∴ we can see why evil exists
- Process theologians believe that God was part of the universe ∴ while he started the evolutionary process, he does not have the power to remove evil (regarded as “The fellow sufferer who understands”)
Triad: What is the problem of removing omnipotence?
God = responsible for creating the universe ex nihilo ∴ is greater than the universe
Triad: What are the effects of removing omnibenevolence?
• Having the power does not mean he wants to
• Why should he care if his creation suffers?
∴ Considered malicious and may enjoy seeing his creation suffer
Triad: What is the problem of removing omnibenevolence?
• So far from the imagination of all Classical theistic religions
Triad: What is the effect of removing ‘evil exists’?
- Our preception is wrong, we cannot see that suffering has a purpose and ∴ is not evil
- Some ‘evils’ are better than actual evil, e.g smacking a child’s hand away from a boiling pot
Triad: What is the problem of removing ‘evil exists’?
Effects of evil are too widely felt to be dismissable
What is Mackie’s ‘Paradox of Omnipotence’?
Theists maintain that there are no limits to what an omnipotent being can do, but the solutions/theodicies limit God’s power while misleadingly keeping the term omnipotence ∴ changed premise
Mackie: “Can an omnipotent being make things which he subsequently cannot control? Or…make rules which then bind himself?”
- “Cannot be answered satisfactorily in either the affirmative or the negative”:
- Yes: “He is not omnipotent once he has made them.”
- No: “immediately asserting that there are things which he cannot do [∴] He is already not omnipotent.”
What is the only solution to the ‘Paradox of Omnipotence’? What is the problem of this?
- “Deny that God is a continuing being” or “by putting God outside time”
- Any solution to the problem of evil that involves free will is immediately compromised
What is Aquinas’ response to the problem of evil?
- Our ‘goodness’/’evil’ may be different from God’s as ours is relative to time/culture whereas God is a perfect, immutable being ∴ his concepts of good/evil are likewise unchangeable
- ∴ no logical contradiction in triad
- ∴ omnipotence is not questioned
Summarise William Rowe’s evidential problem of evil.
- His approach involves consideration of whether, and to what extent, the existence of evil can be used as evidence to argue against God’s existence
- Seems reasonable to allow limited suffering for growth/development but “intense” + animal suffering is not reasonable
- If God = omnipotent+omniscient+omnibenevolent, He would know when suffering is about to take place and could/would want to prevent all suffering that does not have a purpose
- As such evil/suffering exists, God probably does not exist.
What example does William Rowe use to illustrate his point?
A fawn caught in a forest fire
Summarise Gregory Paul’s statistical problem of evil.
• Estimated 50 billion children have died naturally before reaching “the age of mature consent” + 300 billion prenatal deaths (“The Holocaust of the children”)
• Millions of children die every year from natural/evil causes and they are too young to make choices about God.
• No all-loving, all-powerful being would permit this
God does not exist
