Evil and suffering Flashcards
Evil + suffering
- Rock of atheism
- Biblical background to evil to evil: Genesis 3, Adam + Eve disobeyed God’s command through the serpent.
Eternal damnation, since innocence was lost. EG: childbirth is now painful.
Define suffering
Mental + physical pains,animals + humans experience due to moral + natural evil.
What is natural evil?
-Result of things beyond human control EG: genetic mutation.
- Christians find it hard to accept this evils on a large scale.
EG: Boxing day tsunami 2004
Potato famine; Potato blight, population fell by 20-25%
Exodus: “But you blew with your breath + the sea covered them”
What is moral evil?
- Harmful acts of humans or human inaction when someone is in need
- Raises question of God’s character for permitting acts
- Holocaust (Shoah) Mass genocide; doctors torturing + experimenting.
What is the logical problem of evil?
Against God’s existence, based on logic, centres 3 statements
- Inconsistent triad made by Epicurus Greek philosopher
- Is God able to prevent evil? impotent
- Is God willing to prevent evil? God=malevolent
- Is God’s will + able to prevent? Why is there evil?
Denying omnipotent = not worthy of worship
^ omnibenevolent =contradicts Jesus’ teachings + destroys foundation of Christianity.
^Evil = Augustine does this evil is the absence of good “privation boni” just like blindness is absence of sight.
Aquinas = evil is lack of good. Evil of blindness to illustrate; blindness in stone isn’t evil, not meant to see.
What is evidential problem of evil?
1) Quantity + quality of natural + moral evil = overwhelming
Eg: millions of creatures destroyed in natural disasters, before appearance of humans.
Cruelties listed in Dostoyersky’s The brothers Karamzov
Chapter 35; “ I hasten give back my entrance ticket”
One of the characters in the book claim evil = too high a price to pay for heaven.
2)Pointlessness of evil = serves no useful purpose.
Eg: Rowe’s example of fawn suffering a slow + agonising death in a forest fire.
-No good purpose enabling free will, moral + natural evil.
+ an omniscient God has knowledge of suffering.
What is john Mackie’s free will defence?
John Mackie = Atheist builds free will defence to disprove it.
1st order good/evil; at basic level of human experience eg; happiness, pleasure, pain.
2nd order good/evil; More valuable + significant then 1st order goods maximise 1st (kindness + love + jealousy)
3rd order good/evil; free = choice. Pain + suffering needed to develop sympathy “morally” grow doesn’t always work.
4th God teaches us to be morally responsible through free will.
Define free will defence
Humans cannot have free will with the existence of moral evil. Free will is worth the cost of suffering
Mackie’s rejection of his FWD
- logically possible to chose between happiness + pleasure.
- Thus, God hasn’t made people with true free choice between good.
- Shows God lacks power/ love or doesn’t exist
- Mackie does this in his book = miracle of theism, he constructs then rejects it
Plantinga; A02 critic of John Mackie
-Theist
Logical problem of moral evil;
- He gives 3 possible worlds to five 3 options
-World as it is, with “morally significant free will” + no causal determination from God, = means there’s evil + suffering. (Logically possible)
-World without “morally significant free will” but with causal determinism make people choose good + thus no evil. (Logically possible but would make humans robots. Easier to understand 1st scenario)
- Both “morally significant free will” + God’s causal determinism make people choose good, no evil. ( logically impossible - genuine free willlibertarian understanding ) incompatible with causal determinism, thus Mackie’s argument fails.
Natural evil;
-Tied up with punishment from the fall ; logically possible God created/ allowed natural evil, as human sin in Eden
Summarise
LOGICAL PROBLEM OF EVIL: a priori (deductive argument which questions the existence of God)
Mackie argues evil, benevolence, omnipotence, forms an inconsistent triad as they can’t all exist at the same time.
ST augustine “either God cannot or will not abolish evil” thus he is either not powerful or not loving.
EVIDENTIAL PROBLEM OF EVIL: a posteriori (inductive argument- given the huge amount of evil + suffering God is not all-loving etc.
WILLIAM ROWE: uses evidence of evil + suffering in world to form inductive argument against gods existence.
No good comes out of suffering, the intensity, duration + distribution of evil in world, goes against the existence of classical theism
Swinburne
- Theist
- God chases to give free will to let us live enriched life
- a priori; Uses logical reason + removes blame on God, humanities fault.
- Events of evil are necessary for free will
- “less he allows men to bring large scale horrors, less freedom he gives”
Evaluation of Free will Defence
Strengths;
1) Plantinga shows FWD is logically possible in relation to both types of evil
2) FWD addresses issue of natural evil as nature has to be free to follow its laws of operation + evils that result to enable development of second- order goods.
3) World with genuine free will much more value than without it, where humans are in effect robots.
Weakness
1) If accepted God’s omniscience is simply knowledge of a being outside if space + time + is not causative, sheer amount of evil, coupled with apparent pointlessness, raises point of Dostoyeveky’s Ivan: does being free justify such a terrible cost.
Evil + suffering
Rock of atheism
Challenges classical theism
Since his knows about suffering, he is omnicmscient
