the problem of evil Flashcards
what are the two types of evil
natural evil and moral evil
define natural evil
pain and suffering caused by natural processes
define moral evil
pain and suffering caused by the freely chosen action of humans
what are the two arguaments for the problem of evil
the strong (in the philosophical sense) logical argument and the weaker evidentail probelm
whats the main difference between the logical problem and the evidential probel
- logical is aprioir and dedecutive (despite having the one aposteriori cliam that evil exists)
- the evidential argument is aposteriori and inductive
put simply what is the point of the logical argument
god does not exist because belief in god involves contradictions between his attributes and the very existence of evil in the world
what do the logical and evidnetail argument think about the belief of god
- logical= belief in god is irrational
- eviddential= belief in god is unreasonable
put simply what is the evidential argument
the amount and the distribution of evil makes it less likely that good exists, given his attibutes
formally outline the logical problem
- if god is omnipotent he has the power to prevent evil
- if god iss omnibenevolent, he would want to prevent evil
- if god is omniscient he would know how to prevent evil
- evil exists
- therefore, an omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent god cannot exist as what is logically impossible
what iis the main difference between the aetheist problem of evil and the religous problem
- for the atheist natural evil is not a problem as there are no steps they can take to prevent it
- for religous people they believe in an all powerful god who would stop these devsatating wide s cale events from occuring
what does sartre say regardin the problem of evil
- pain and suffering are just a fact of existence
- we should just live with the fact that there is no god and accept the consequences of his absence
- feel abandonned by him
why does sartre say that believing in god is bad faith
- because sartre believes in free will
- just submitting to this imaginary power and hoping that all our actions will amount to something is dangerous when we can control it
how does midgley differ from sartre
- while both atheists she takes a more determinist view point
how does midgley see evil
- she sees evil as being a lack of something not as being a metaphysical thing
- we are aqll vulnerbale to this
- need to look into it pyschologically and learn to understand how to control it and limit it
define fatalism
you cant do anything to chnage what your “fate” is
define determinsim
causes for things can be identified and some degree of predictiveness is possible
what is the evidential problem of evil
- due to the distirbution of evil in the world there is good evidence that god probably does not exist (this is a weak argument in the sens ethat is doesnt make strong claims)
translate privatio bonito
lack of good
what are the 4 theological responses to the evidential problem
- alternative theology
- afterlife defence
- free wil defence
- soul making defence
put simply what is alternative theology
- god does exist but he must lack omnipotence, omniscience or omnibenevolence (but this is sort of admitting defeat)
put simply what is the afterlife defence
- god exists and has all his attributes, the existenceof pain and suffering in the world is balanced out by an even greater good in the after life
put simply what is the free will defence
- god does exist and does so with his attributes and pain and suffering is simply the consequence of the greater good of free will