Problem of evil Flashcards
Outline the problems of evil
Logical problem of evil: the incompatible nature of evil existing simultaneously with an omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipotent God. Mackie’s inconsistent triad depicts this.
Hume argues God is either impotent and does not have the power to prevent evil, or malevolent and so has the power to prevent evil but chooses not to.
Evidential: how can an omnibenevolent God existence justify the sheer extent of evil we seen in the world.
Outline the forms of evil
Moral evil - evil acts committed by humans.
Naturally occurring evil
Outline Mackie’s FWD
Mackie’s constructs his Free Will Defence in attempt to later dispute it.
He explains God allows evil to exist and is justified in doing so because it permits us to freely choose or reject the good. This teaches us to be morally responsible and gives meaning and value to first and second order goods. Freedom gives values to everything but can only be obtained with the risk and possibility of first and second order evils.
Natural evil occurs because nature must also be free to operate by the laws which govern it, interference from God would mean it is no longer free.
Outline Mackie’s rejection of the FWD
Mackie argues God could have created a world in which humans freely and always choose the good. The presence of evil is evidence to Mackie that either God is not omnipotent, or omnibenevolent and therefore the Theist God does not exist.
Outline Plantinga’s defence of the FWD
Morally Sufficient reason 1:
“It would be impossible to causally determine human actions and at the same time allow them to be morally free” - Plantinga
The possible world Mackie describes is logically impossible and contradictory.
Morally sufficient reason 2:
Natural evil is a product of human action. Plantinga argues that evil exists due to the original sin which brought about a disharmony between heaven and earth, putting the world in a postlapsarian state.
Evaluate the FWD
+ Plantinga successfully refutes Mackie’s critiques. MSR1 shows that his possible world is nonsensical.
+ Humans value free will - Augustine “a runaway horse is better than a stone”
+ Gives a satisfactory explanation to why moral evils exists which is consistent with society views. The legal system works on the belief humans have free will and can therefore be held morally responsible.
- Requires a libertarian perspective to free will. Hard determinist, Spinoza argues free will is merely an illusion.
- Doesn’t solve the evidential problem of evil. If God is omniscient there must have been an awareness to the extent of suffering which would occur. Why create a universe at all if this was the case.
- The reward of heaven does not justify the extent of evil for some people. Dostoevsky’s “Brothers Karamazov” Ivan claims they want to give their “ticket” back.
- Most Christians view the doctrine of the fall as a metaphorical biblical analogy opposed to fact. Therefore making Plantinga’s defence weaker.
Outline Hick’s soul making theodicy
Built on St Irenaeus’s ideas that humans are intentionally imperfectly created in order for us to develop into the “likeness” of God. Irenaeus believed there is a two stage creation process of humans; we are born in the “image” of God and develop into the “likeness” of God.
We develop into this likeness by developing virtues. Development cannot occur in a morally static universe and therefore evil has an instrumental purpose so humans can develop virtues such as compassion, empathy and courage
Swinburne describes how these virtues are “in proportion to the severity of suffering experienced”
Hick argues in order to ensure humans are acting out of virtue and choice rather than fear of punishment from God there must be an epistemic distance.
The soul making theodicy has eschatological foundations in order to explain what Hick views as the strongest form of evil, eternity in hell. Hick argues not everyone is able to morally develop in this lifetime and so this journey of development continues in the afterlife until everyone is eventually saved. This concept is known as Universal Salvation.
Evaluate Hick’s soul making theodicy
The notion of an epistemic distance satisfyingly explains most forms of evil as any interference from God would remove this gap in knowledge and undermine human’s free will.
Consistent with St Irenaeus’s theories on human development and the purpose of evil. Moral development is also valued in modern society making Hick’s soul making theodicy compatible with contemporary ideas as well as having historical validity.
Academic credibility - human development is compatible with evolutionary theories.
Universal salvation justifies God’s omnibenevolence in ways St Augustine’s soul deciding theodicy cannot.
Not all evil appears instrumental to personal growth. Rowe uses the analogy of a fawn dying in a burning forest. Nobody is aware of this event meaning no moral development could occur from it, rendering it pointless.
Theodicy does not account for unproportionate distribution of evil.
Universal Salvation and ideas of “imago dei” is not consistent with tradition Christian teachings. Universalism seems to undermine Jesus’ sacrificial death and doctrines such as judgement.
D.Z Phillips argues describing evil as an instrument for development is offensive. “We cannot speak of moral growth this way”
Outline Process Theology
Griffin rejects God’s omnipotence and “creatio ex nihlo” due to an alternative translation of Genesis. Rather than “the earth was without form and void” Griffin’s interpretation of scripture says the earth “being without form and void.” These slight differences suggest God brought order to pre-existing chaotic matter, opposed to creating the world and matter from nothing.
God is not transcendent and exists in a pantheistic relationship with the universe, they both exist necessarily and eternally.
As the soul of the universe, God shares in its suffering.
Over periods of time God can persuade matter but cannot instantaneously act on it. Similarly aggregates have no lead molecules which God can influence to prevent natural evils ie: earthquakes.
Griffin argues as God led matter to increase in complexity this intensifies the problem of evil.
Evaluate Griffin’s Process theology
+ As the soul of the universe God shares in its suffering. A.N Whitehead describes God as as a “fellow sufferer.” This can make people feel comforted during times of suffering compared to God being at an epistemic distance.
+If Griffin rejects God’s omnipotence, Mackie’s inconsistent triad is supposedly removed.
- Griffin’s process theology fails to solve the problem of evil as the God Griffin describes is not the traditional Judaeo-Christian God. He is not omnipotent and therefore there is no problem of evil to solve.
If God is omniscient and knows the extent of evil which the world would have, why begin such a process.
Griffin’s God is not worthy of worship. John Roth argues “a God of such weakness no matter how much he suffers is rather pathetic”
