Problem of evil Flashcards
1
Q
What is the logical problem of evil?
A
- An a priori argument against the existence of God
- uses logic alone without the need for experience
2
Q
Inconsistent triad
A
- introduced by Epicurus, developed into the triad by J.L Mackie
- God is perfectly good, God is all-powerful, evil and suffering exist
- this triad is inconsistent because we cannot believe all of these at the same time without contradiction
3
Q
Hans Kung - challenge to logical problem of evil
A
- God suffered on the cross so he could look evil directly in the face
- he will not desert humanity because he has experienced suffering
4
Q
What is the evidential problem of evil?
A
- Uses a posteriori evidence of our own suffering and loss to challenge the existence of an omnibenevolent, omnipotent God
5
Q
David Hume - support for the EPOE
A
- Animals suffering - they have limited abilities to allow their survival
- natural disasters, disease
- God could’ve made this world without such evil
- He could have allowed evil to exist for reasons linked to omnibenevolence, but they are “unknown to us”
6
Q
John Stewart Mill - support for EPOE
A
- used examples of natures cruelty (digger wasps)
- “Nearly all the things which men are hanged for and imprisoned for doing to one another are natures everyday performances”.
- humans do what God has exhibited in nature yet we get punished for it
7
Q
Augustine’s theodicy
A
- we have a natural predisposition to sin because we were infected with original sin after the events of Genesis 3
- this created a gap between God and humans
- the only way to bridge this gap is to achieve salvation (through accepting God’s grace)
8
Q
Augustine’s explanation of evil
A
- “all evil is sin or punishment for sin”
- evil doesn’t actually exist, it is a privation of good (privatio boni)
- as humans fell away from God this resulted in evil
9
Q
Plantinga’s free will defence
A
- Alvin Plantinga developed Augustine’s theodicy
- the free will defence is the co-existence of God and evil
- it is possible for them to co-exist because evil is the product of free will
- Natural evil is also caused by the free will of demons
10
Q
Challenges and response to Plantinga’s free will defence
A
- Plantinga’s argument raises the question of why God gave us free will in the first place
- Plantinga responded that free will gives us value
- however, this justifies any evil in the world because we are valuable beings
- Plantinga would argue that free will is the greater good. Removing free will in order to remove evil would be logically impossible
11
Q
Pelagius - challenge to Augustine’s theodicy
A
- Pelagius argued that if we have original sin, and thus are unable to avoid sinful behaviour, then it is unjust for God to punish us for being sinful beings. It is not ethical for all of humanity to be blamed on the actions of Adam and Eve.
12
Q
How did Augustine defend his argument
A
- “secret yet just judgement of God”
- it is impossible for us to understand why God made the world like this
13
Q
Christian Scientists - support for Augustine’s theodicy
A
- support the non-existence of evil
- it is an illusion - sin, sickness and death would disappear if they were understood to be nothingness
- however, evil is real enough - we can see its effects which cannot be ignored
14
Q
Irenaeus’ theodicy
A
- the fall was a necessary stage in human development towards perfection
- built his approach on Genesis 1:26 “let us make man in our own image, according to our likeness”
- it is essential for humans to have free will so they can develop a relationship with God
- evil was created to help us grow and learn the right way through experience
- end goal for a human who experiences suffering is eschatological salvation
15
Q
Dostoevsky - challenge to Irenaeus’ theodicy
A
- nothing can justify the unnecessary suffering of a child - brothers Karamazov
- the price we are expected to pay for our freedom of choice is too high
- no guarantee that suffering will result in moral gain or salvation
- it is unfair that other people need to suffer in order for us to develop a meaningful relationship with God
16
Q
Animal/human suffering - challenge to Irenaeus’ theodicy
A
- animal suffering is hard to explain using this view
- if suffering is used to help us learn and develop our relationship with God, this is unfair as it doesn’t apply to animals
- additionally, suffering makes people’s lives worse rather than better and stronger - it can even make them lose faith
17
Q
John Hick - soul making theodicy
A
- If evil exists to produce good then we cannot explain hell - it must be a temporary place where we undergo preparation to develop into God’s likeness
- people who believe in different God’s/atheists will be saved eventually - universal salvation
- replica theory - when we die, a replica of us appears in the afterlife
- evil exists so we can choose good
18
Q
Richard Swinburne - development of the soul making theodicy
A
- natural evil is a precondition of moral evil
- natural evil is logically necessary for people to know how to create evil or prevent it
- God gives us the opportunity to exercise responsibility
19
Q
D.Z Phillips - criticism of soul making theodicies
A
- There are many evils which are too extreme to justify God, like the holocaust
- if God is omnipotent then there must be another way to allow us to have responsibility without relying on the suffering of other people
20
Q
Challenge to John Hick’s soul making theodicy - undermining the value of Christianity
A
- undermines the importance of Christ dying on the cross for our sins if there are multiple ways to achieve salvation
- the same outcome would happen without the sacrifice of Jesus which makes the whole story appear pointless
- this is problematic as it is the core of Christianity
