The problem of evil Flashcards
(17 cards)
Why is the problem of evil and suffering often described as a logical problem?
The logical problem of evil is a deductive argument. It aims to show that the existence of evil is logically inconsistent with the existence of the God of classical theism – God defined as omnipotent, omnibenevolent and omniscience
Mackies inconsistent triad:
P1. An omnipotent God has the power to eliminate evil.
P2. An omnibenevolent God has the motivation to eliminate evil.
P3. Nothing can exist if there is a being with the power and motivation to eliminate it.
C1. Evil, omnipotence and omnibenevolence thus form an inconsistent triad such that God (as classically defined) and evil cannot possibly co-exist.
Possible solutions to the problem of evil
-It is possible to avoid these contradictions between the attributes of God by concluding that this type of God would not be worth worshiping, cannot exist, or our understanding of what God is like needs to change.
Evaluate whether the problem of evil challenges belief
(-)Good cannot exist without evil
(+)Secular society- less people believe in God and the presence of evil and suffering further challenges beliefs in God.
(-)There may be good reasons for allowing evil to continue, e.g. there may be a good outcome from the results of evil. Pain and disease are necessary for the development of sympathy, courage and cures. Hick argues that the end justifies the means in that true courage and empathy can be developed only in the experience of suffering.
(+)Do we need to experience this amount of evil ad suffering to ‘teach us a lesson’
(+)The imbalance of natural and evil suffering between people, and innocent people.
What is meant by theodicy?
A defence or justification of God in the face of evil and suffering
what is meant by ‘privation’?
Evil is not a substance itself but it is a privation, or a lack of goodness
What is Augustines theodicy?
Starts with Genesis 1, before the fall, where humans were perfectly good. He claims that God cannot be blamed for evil because God cannot create a privation or a lack of something.
What reasons does Augustine provide for the existence of moral evil?
-The fall of humans: Adam and Eve disobeyed God
-The first sin corrupted human nature, so that bad choices, wrong actions and death are now part of being human. Seminally present, so evil continues
-Because of original sin and immoral choices, everyone deserves to be punished. God is justified because he is not to blame for the poor choices of humans
What reasons doe Augustine provide for the existence of natural evil?
-The fall of the angels, caused disharmony and imbalance in nature. The imbalance led to natural disasters such as hurricanes and tsunamis
-God is just in allowing it to continue as it acts as a punishment for original sin.
Limitations of Augustine’s theodicy
(-)If God created a perfect world, then where did evil come from?Why would anyone rebel in a perfect world?If they chose evil, it suggests they must have had knowledge of it, so God may be partially responsible
(-)Modern science contradicts the theory that Adam is seminally present in all of us
(-)His explanation for natural evil, caused by the fall of angels, is not compatible to modern thinking, especially in an increasingly secular society.
Hicks theodicy
- Value of soul making > nautural and moral evil have a purpose, to allow humans to develop into the likeliness of God
- A good person is onw who chooses good over evil
-To get into heaven we’ve got to become good people. - So, God has to allow evil to exist to give us a chance to become good people (by choosing good over it).
- Universal salvation > everyone will eventually be saved or welcomed to heaven after death
- Epistemic distance > allows complete freedom to develop character and genuine love for God
Weaknesses of Hick’s theodicy
(-)Value of soul making - Hume asks whether our world could be a bit more hospitable and still teach us and allow us to develop virtuous characteristics
(-)Universal salvation - Jesus died to save us from sins, was this ineffective in saving us?
(-)Epistemic distance - many people may question their love for God if they are living in a world surrounded by evil and suffering.
What is the evidential problem of evil?
The evidential problem was first put forward by Hume. Hume was clear that he doesn’t think the co-existence of God and evil is impossible. He accepts that it’s technically possible that a perfect God created an imperfect world for reasons consistent with God’s perfection.
Pelagius
- Pelagius argued that if we have original sin and are thus completely unable to avoid doing evil, it would surely be unjust for God to punish us for our sinful behaviour.
- It’s not ethical for all humanity to be blamed for the actions of Adam and Eve.
This suggests an indefensible view of moral responsibility – that people can be responsible for actions committed by others which is of special absurdity in this case since the action occurred before they were even born. - Evil is educated
Counter to the value of soul making
Some evil is dysteleological (purposeless).
It has no chance of leading to spiritual development. For example, a child who dies of cancer. They are too young to even understand what is happening, let alone learn anything from it.
Second counter to the value of soul making
- Some evil is soul breaking. It destroys a persons character rather than building it up and devloping it
- There is an imbalance
- Natural evil seems purposeless, even if it is supposed to lead to character development, this doesn’t seem to be the case + the distribution
- Why would Adam and Eve be the only humans to experience pure goodness, seems vindictive
- focus on human development, but animals also experience immense suffering. If animals aren’t capable of moral or spiritual growth, why would a loving God permit their pain?
If heaven is a place with no evil but free will still exists, then this contradicts the soul-making argument that evil is necessary for development.
Objection: If God can create heaven where free beings choose good, why not start with that?
If God can create heaven where free beings choose god, why not start with that? COUNER ONLY
- God did create a perfect environment without evil—the Garden of Eden—but it failed because Adam and Eve, despite being in a paradise, still chose evil.
This implies:
- Free will necessarily entails the possibility of moral failure.
- Even in a “perfect” setting, humans were not yet morally mature—which supports the Irenaean view that moral and spiritual growth requires a journey, not instant perfection
- However, if the Garden of Eden were truly perfect, there would have been no forbidden fruit, no serpent, and no temptation. Therefore, it wasn’t really a paradise or heaven-like at all. This suggests that evil - or at least the potential for it - was part of the origional creation. Therefore, the Garden of Eden cannot be seen as a perfect creation, but rather as a flawed moral testing ground. Hick and Irenaeus’ theodicy struggles to coherently explain why a benevolent God would embed temptation into the very structure of a supposedly “good” creation.
