the problem of evil - power point

7/25/2019 The Problem of Evil - Power Point

1/25

The Problem of Evil andThe Problem of Evil and

SufferingSufferingHere we consider an argument asHere we consider an argument as

to why God might not existto why God might not exist


2/25

EvilEvil

A prime argument against there being aA prime argument against there being a

GodGod

Term evil usually refers to somethingTerm evil usually refers to somethingmorally wrongmorally wrong

Philosophers distinguish between moralPhilosophers distinguish between moral

evil and natural evilevil and natural evil

!onse"uence of evil is suffering!onse"uence of evil is suffering


3/25

The problem of evilThe problem of evil

God is described as#God is described as#All$%nowingAll$%nowing

All$powerfulAll$powerful

All$lovingAll$loving &f all$%nowing he %nows we suffer&f all$%nowing he %nows we suffer

&f all$powerful he can stop suffering&f all$powerful he can stop suffering

&f all$loving he would want to stop suffering&f all$loving he would want to stop suffering

'e do suffer'e do suffer Therefore God is either not as described or simplyTherefore God is either not as described or simply

does not existdoes not exist


4/25

(ifferent gods(ifferent gods

The problem of evil is specific to religionsThe problem of evil is specific to religions

following classic theism e)g) !hristianity*following classic theism e)g) !hristianity*

+udaism+udaism

,ther religions allow for more that one,ther religions allow for more that one

god* one of which could be responsible forgod* one of which could be responsible for

our sufferingour suffering


5/25

(avid Hume(avid Hume

Hume considers that the problem of evil isHume considers that the problem of evil is

too great to be dismissedtoo great to be dismissed

Therefore to accept that evil exists meansTherefore to accept that evil exists meansaccepting that God is either impotent oraccepting that God is either impotent or

maliciousmalicious

This leads to the death of the God ofThis leads to the death of the God of

classical theismclassical theism

Therefore God does not existTherefore God does not exist


6/25

Thomas A"uinasThomas A"uinas

A"uinas agreed* the presence of evilA"uinas agreed* the presence of evillogically leads to the absence of a Godlogically leads to the absence of a God

However* whilst Hume was an atheistHowever* whilst Hume was an atheistA"uinas was a believerA"uinas was a believerThis is because#This is because#The logical argument only wor%s if we acceptThe logical argument only wor%s if we accept

That the concept of infinite goodness is part of theThat the concept of infinite goodness is part of thedefinition of Goddefinition of God

&n tal%ing about Gods goodness we are referring&n tal%ing about Gods goodness we are referringto the same thing as human goodnessto the same thing as human goodness


7/25

Augustines TheodicyAugustines Theodicy

The origin of evilThe origin of evilGod is perfectGod is perfect

God made the world perfectGod made the world perfect

Evil is a deprivationEvil is a deprivationA deprivation cannot be createdA deprivation cannot be created

Therefore God cannot be blamed for evilTherefore God cannot be blamed for evil


8/25


The possibility of evilThe possibility of evilEvil comes from angels and humans whoEvil comes from angels and humans who

choose to turn away from Godchoose to turn away from God

TheThepossibilitypossibilityof evil is necessaryof evil is necessary,nly God is perfect* created beings are,nly God is perfect* created beings are

susceptible to changesusceptible to change

Everyone is guilty as everyone wasEveryone is guilty as everyone wasseminally present in Adamseminally present in Adam

Therefore we all deserve punishmentTherefore we all deserve punishment


9/25


Punishment for evilPunishment for evilHuman action destroyed natural order thatHuman action destroyed natural order that

brought about natural evilbrought about natural evil

-atural evil is a fitting punishment-atural evil is a fitting punishment

Therefore God is right not to intervene andTherefore God is right not to intervene and

stop the sufferingstop the suffering

However* God does show his mercy andHowever* God does show his mercy and.ustice by saving some through +esus.ustice by saving some through +esus

!hrist!hrist


10/25


StrengthsStrengths /rian (avies supports idea that evil is not a substance/rian (avies supports idea that evil is not a substance

0ather it is a gap between what is and what ought to be)0ather it is a gap between what is and what ought to be) Therefore Augustine right to say God not to blame for creation ofTherefore Augustine right to say God not to blame for creation of

evilevil

1ree will supports idea that humans responsible for evil1ree will supports idea that humans responsible for evil Plantinga argues that if humans created so that they can onlyPlantinga argues that if humans created so that they can only

choose good they would not be free)choose good they would not be free)

Accounts for natural evil which came through moral evilAccounts for natural evil which came through moral evil 0easonable to accept the value of free will being worth0easonable to accept the value of free will being worth

the ris% of evilthe ris% of evil Augustines account is popular with !hristians as it fitsAugustines account is popular with !hristians as it fits

with the creation accountwith the creation account


11/25


'ee%nesses'ee%nesses2ogical errors2ogical errors

Schleiermacher argued that there is a logicalSchleiermacher argued that there is a logical

contradiction in the idea of a perfect world goingcontradiction in the idea of a perfect world going

wrongwrongEven if evil is a deprivation it is still present in the worldEven if evil is a deprivation it is still present in the world

A further contradiction appears by saying thatA further contradiction appears by saying that

people with no %nowledge of good and evil canpeople with no %nowledge of good and evil can

choose to do evil)choose to do evil)This implies that %nowledge of evil had to be given byThis implies that %nowledge of evil had to be given by

GodGod


12/25


'ee%nesses'ee%nessesScientific errorsScientific errorsEvolution has shown the difficulties inEvolution has shown the difficulties in

accepting the Genesis story on whichaccepting the Genesis story on which

Augustine reliesAugustine relies/iological understanding shows that people/iological understanding shows that people

cannot have been seminally present in Adamcannot have been seminally present in Adam

Therefore God would be un.ust to punishTherefore God would be un.ust to punisheveryone)everyone)


13/25


'ee%nesses'ee%nesses3oral errors3oral errorsHell appears to be part of the universe whichHell appears to be part of the universe which

means that God must have created it %nowingmeans that God must have created it %nowing

the world would go wrongthe world would go wrongGods saving of some show an irrationalGods saving of some show an irrational

approach to mercy and raises seriousapproach to mercy and raises serious

"uestions about his goodness"uestions about his goodness


14/25

&renaeus Theodicy&renaeus Theodicy

A perfectly imperfect creationA perfectly imperfect creation

4nli%e Augustine* &renaeus accepted that4nli%e Augustine* &renaeus accepted that

God was at least partly to blame forGod was at least partly to blame for

presence of evil* but with good reason#presence of evil* but with good reason#Gods aim in creation was to ma%e perfectGods aim in creation was to ma%e perfect

peoplepeople

Human perfection cannot be ready made andHuman perfection cannot be ready made and

has to develophas to develop


15/25


The only choice is free willThe only choice is free will

God had to give free choice and thereforeGod had to give free choice and therefore

freedom to disobeyfreedom to disobey

This leads to the possibility of evilThis leads to the possibility of evilTherefore the natural order had to beTherefore the natural order had to be

designed with the possibility for doingdesigned with the possibility for doing

harmharm


16/25


Evil is .ustifiedEvil is .ustified

Humans used free will to disobey God andHumans used free will to disobey God and

brought about sufferingbrought about suffering

God cannot remove evil as that wouldGod cannot remove evil as that wouldcompromise our freedomcompromise our freedom

Eventually everyone will develop into theEventually everyone will develop into the

li%eness of God overcoming all evil)li%eness of God overcoming all evil)Therefore temporal evil is .ustifiedTherefore temporal evil is .ustified


17/25


StrengthsStrengths+ohn Hic% agreed that free will was+ohn Hic% agreed that free will was

necessarynecessaryThe love of a robot has no valueThe love of a robot has no value

Peter 5ardy also agreesPeter 5ardy also agrees,nly love that is offered freely is of value,nly love that is offered freely is of value


18/25


StrengthsStrengths &f we accept that human perfection has to&f we accept that human perfection has to

be developed* then#be developed* then#'e had to be created imperfect'e had to be created imperfectHave to be free to be able to go against GodHave to be free to be able to go against God

'e had to be distanced from God'e had to be distanced from God+ Hic% refers to this as+ Hic% refers to this as epistemic distanceepistemic distance

The natural world could not be a paradiseThe natural world could not be a paradiseTrue freedom demands that we can cause harmTrue freedom demands that we can cause harm


19/25


StrengthsStrengths The counterfactual hypothesis considers theThe counterfactual hypothesis considers the

conse"uences of a situation being brought aboutconse"uences of a situation being brought aboutin a different way to what in fact happens)in a different way to what in fact happens)

The counterfactual hypothesis shows that theThe counterfactual hypothesis shows that thepurposes of God could not be achieve withoutpurposes of God could not be achieve withoutthe presence of evil and sufferingthe presence of evil and suffering

Hic% concludes that while our world is not#Hic% concludes that while our world is not#

66designed for the maximisation of human pleasure and thedesigned for the maximisation of human pleasure and theminimisation of human pain* it may nevertheless be ratherminimisation of human pain* it may nevertheless be ratherwell adapted to the "uite different purpose of soul$ma%ing7well adapted to the "uite different purpose of soul$ma%ing7

+ohn Hic%*+ohn Hic%* Philosophy of Religion,Philosophy of Religion, 88ththedn* 9::;edn* 9::;


20/25


StrengthsStrengths2ife does not always end in human2ife does not always end in human

developmentdevelopment

3any suffer badly throughout life3any suffer badly throughout life

Therefore only a supreme life in heavenTherefore only a supreme life in heaven

can .ustify the present sufferingcan .ustify the present suffering

Even evil people are victims are deserveEven evil people are victims are deservethe mercy and .ustice of Godthe mercy and .ustice of God


21/25


'ea%nesses'ea%nesses!oncept of heaven for all is un.ust!oncept of heaven for all is un.ust

&t does not correspond with biblical view of&t does not correspond with biblical view of

eternal punishmenteternal punishment

&t ma%es good moral behaviour pointless&t ma%es good moral behaviour pointless

Therefore there is no incentive to developTherefore there is no incentive to develop

which is the point of &renaeus theodicywhich is the point of &renaeus theodicy


22/25


'ea%nesses'ea%nesses Phillips agues that it is never .ustifiable to harm someone

in order to help themin order to help them -ote that this is precisely what the medical profession do-ote that this is precisely what the medical profession do

when operating on someonewhen operating on someone


23/25


'ea%nesses'ea%nesses!oncept of heaven for all is un.ust!oncept of heaven for all is un.ust

&t does not correspond with biblical view of&t does not correspond with biblical view of

eternal punishmenteternal punishment

&t ma%es good moral behaviour pointless&t ma%es good moral behaviour pointless

Therefore there is no incentive to develop*Therefore there is no incentive to develop*

which is the point of &renaeus theodicywhich is the point of &renaeus theodicy


24/25

!onclusions!onclusions

/oth theodicies claim that free will is essential/oth theodicies claim that free will is essential 1or Augustine evil is unavoidable for free will to1or Augustine evil is unavoidable for free will to

existexist

1or &renaeus evil is seen as a necessity in order1or &renaeus evil is seen as a necessity in orderthat humans can developthat humans can develop

+ 2 3ac%ie argued that as some people choose+ 2 3ac%ie argued that as some people choosewhat is right* God could have created beings thatwhat is right* God could have created beings that

always chose to do right)always chose to do right) This idea is challenged on the basis that to only haveThis idea is challenged on the basis that to only have

the ability to choose right is the same as no choice atthe ability to choose right is the same as no choice atall and amounts to the loss of free will)all and amounts to the loss of free will)


25/25

Putting it altogetherPutting it altogether

'rite bullet points that show how you'rite bullet points that show how you

would go about answering the followingwould go about answering the following

exam "uestion#exam "uestion#

a?a? Explain either the theodicy of Augustine or ofExplain either the theodicy of Augustine or of

&reneaus) @?&reneaus) @?

b?b? 66Suffering does not ma%e us better people* itSuffering does not ma%e us better people* it

.ust ma%es us miserable)7 (iscuss @9B?.ust ma%es us miserable)7 (iscuss @9B?

the problem of evil - power point

Documents