Soul-making vs Dostoyevsky

Question 1

A strength of soul-making

Answer 1

-evil serving some good purpose seems best way to make it ocmpatible w omnibenevolence
=hicks book ‘evil+ god of love’
-other theodicies less persuasive as they try blame humanity for actions of the past or take away gods omnipotence

Question 2

Weakness: Dostoyevsky’s character Ivan.
quote

Answer 2

“if everyone must suffer, in order to buy eternal harmony with their suffering, pray tell me what have children got to do with it?”

Question 3

Weakness: Dostoyevsky’s character Ivan.

Answer 3

-key pount of argument: his connection between the suffering of innocent children and the gain of heaven for others.
-ppl go heaven bc of suffering of innocent kids. he says no good person or god would design this connection into heaven
-the whole process of soul-making is actually not morally acceptable

Question 4

Final judgement defending Hick

Answer 4

-in Dostoyevsky’s book, the response given to Ivan is that earthly suffering will “pass away in eternity”.
-william lane craig makes similar argument regard kid suffering=they will go straight to heaven
-Heaven is infinite. It is worth suffering from evil to get there

Question 5

Final judgement critiquing Hick

Answer 5

-ivan critique is succesful as it gets around hicks standard defences
-he dont say every case of evil is soul making benefit but possibility of soul making requires world where evil is possible
=not morally acceptable+his own moral cirtue compels him to reject