Evil and Suffering Flashcards
Summary
- The Logical Problem of Evil and Suffering
- Counter to the Logical Problem
- Ireneaen Theodicy
- Augustinian Theodicy
Logical Problem of Evil and Suffering
- Epicurean Paradox: willing but not able? not omnipotent. able but not willling? malevolent. able and willing? whence cometh evil. Neither able nor willing? why call him God.
- Mackie’s Inconsistent Triad (all 3 statements cannot all be true without contradiction) 1. Evil exists 2. God is omnipotent 3. God is omnibenevolent
- Hume: Contradictory to have an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God and for Evil to exist.
(If omnibenevolent: contrary to his intention) (If omnipotent: his intention would be acted upon properly)
Hume: evil and suffering is the “rock of atheism”
Counter to Logical Problem (Summary)
- Evil Exists (There is no evil, are view of evil is distorted)
- God is all loving and all powerful
Irenaean Theodicy
- “Let us make mankind in our image and in our likeness”
- Free Will
- Moral Development
- Universal Salvation
- Hick’s Vale of Soul Making
- Hick’s Epistemic Distance
- Criticisms
Augustinian Theodicy
- Creation
- Evil Explanation
- Intervention
- Pre-destination
- Aesthetic Theory
- Contrast Theory
- Criticisms
- Process Theodicy
Premise 1: Evil Exists
There is no Evil
- Monists: universe is a harmonious unity that is good
- If we could see the full picture we would understand that evil is a mere illusion in our minds.
- Spinoza: we consider things in terms of how useful they are to us and we miss their true value
- If we looked at the universe objectively, we would see everything has unique value
Are view of evil is distorted
- Hindus and Buddhists: evil is an illusion brought about by human greed and selfishness
- Hindu: Evil is the result of past sin
- Buddhists: Evil is an illusion brought about by attachments to greed, passion and popularity
Premise 2: God is all loving and omnipotent
- Deism: God is impersonal, not necessarily loving
- Zoroastianism: endless battle between good and evil
- Vardy: such dualist notions can be seen between two Gods
“Let us make mankind in our image in our likeness”
Image: intelligent, conscious beings with a moral nature
Likeness: humans must grow into the likeness of God (through developing moral nature)
- Free Will
.- We have to be like God, free to make our own choices. If God hadn’t given us free will we wouldn’t be in his image.
- Moral Development
- We have to develop and mature to reach our full potential
(growing into the likeness of God) - Genuine moral development only possible in a world where pain is real (without which, actions have no consequences)
Swinburne: “many of the moral virtues we admire are only possible in an imperfect world”
- Universal Salvation
- Suffering can lead some people to moral degregation
- For E + S to be justified, all must be attain perfection
- Universal Salvation: everyone makes it to heaven
Hick’s Vale of Soul Making
- God allows suffering for higher purpose of moral development.
- “virtues through hardship” are infinitely better than any virtues instilled in us from birth
- Perfect world is something to look forward to
Hick: Epistemic Distance
- If God intervened, this undermines human freedom
- God creates epistemic distance (close but far away)
- God makes his existence uncertain (if we knew God was real, we would behave out of fear, not virtue)
Criticism
- Do ends justify the means: not acceptable to do bad to achieve good
- Suffering often leads to moral degregation
- Is universal salvation fair?
Creation (Augustian)
- God is perfect, and God created the world. God created a perfect world.
- “God saw all that he made and it was very good” - Genesis
- God created the world without natural and moral evil
