Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL + SUFFERING - Coggle Diagram
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL + SUFFERING
Plantings - Free Will Defence
Argument that God has given free will to bring about a greater good
A world containing creatures who are significantly free (and freely perform more good than evil action) is more valuable, all else being equal, than a world containing no free creatures at all
Those who defend the Free Will Defence have 2 things to prove:
1.That free will necessarily leads to moral evil
Augustine - For a runaway horse is better than a stone
This represents the idea that a horse that has freedom + has runaway is better than just having a stone/being stuck/programmed/conditioned to act in a certain way
CS Lewis - Free will, though it makes evil possible, also makes possible any love or goodness or joy worth having
We could not have goodness without free will - which means we must also have the risk of evil + suffering
Those who defend the Free Will Defence have 2 things to prove
That free will necessarily leads to moral evil - it's not possible to have free will + not moral evil in the world
- if you allow people to have free will, there is a risk that they will use it in the wrong way
That the results of having free will are worth the price
- is free will worth it if we have all this evil + suffering within the world ?
Swinburne - 'The less (God) allows men to bring about large scale horrors, the less freedom + responsibility he gives them
In order to give us freedom + responsibility, God had to risk us being able to cause chaos/destruction - it was part of the 'package'
Alvin Plantinga - 'The actualisation of a world containing moral good is not just up to God alone; it also depends upon what the significantly free creatures of the world would do'
-
Key Text = God, Freedom, Evil
Ultimately, God's role is to provide us with freedom + responsibility, it is then over to us whether the world is filled with goodness, or evil + suffering
John Mackie
In order to criticise the free will defence, he has to explain what it is, this is his way of explaining it - t
he free will defence states that we could not have first order goods and second order goods without freedom
These goods have to be freely chosen in order to have value
If they are not being freely chosen by us, then why are we being rewarded for them? why are they seen as being good because they are being done automatically?
Its like congratulating a machine for something it's been programmed to do, whereas if you have freedom it gives these order goods value + meaning
Whole point is
if you have freedom, that means you have choices (to do order goods or order evils)
Summary - God is justified in allowing evil in the universe because it permits the freedom to choose or reject the good. It teaches us to be morally responsible + gives meaning to moral goodness
First Order Goods
Happiness + Pleasure
First Order Evils
Unhappiess, pain +
Second Order Goods
Sympathy, understanding, kindness, compassion, love, generosity, self-sacrifice
Second Order Evils
Spite, meanness, envy, jealousy, greed, selfishness
Third Order Good
Freedom (greater good)
Fourth Order Good
God