PROBLEM OF EVIL & SUFFERING

THE FREE WILL DEFENCE

  • God has given humans free will to bring about a greater good
  • A world containing creatures who are significantly free (and freely perform more good than evil actions) is more valuable than a world containing bio free creatures at all

"For a runaway horse is better than a stone" [AUGUSTINE]


"Free will, though it makes evil possible, also makes possible any lobe or goodness worth having" [CS LEWIS]

  • Those who defend the FWD have 2 things to prove:



    • 1) That FW necessarily leads to moral evil- its not possible to have FW and not moral evil in the world


    • 2) The results of having free will are worth the price

MACKIE

  • produces his own version of the FWD in order to criticise it
  • First order goods = happiness and pleasure
  • First order evils = unhappiness, pain & misery
  • If we come across somebody in a state of first-order evil, we can either reduce their misery by being sympathetic, understanding or kind OR we can worsen heir misery through spite, meanness, selfishness
  • In the same way if we come across somebody in a state of first-order good, we can either increase their pleasure or remove it
  • Second order goods = sympathy, understanding, kindness, compassion, love [maximise first order goods and minimise first order evils]
  • Second order evil = spite, meanness, jealousy, envy, greed, selfishness [exists to maximise first order evil & minimise first order goods]
  • Freedom = third-order good as it allows us to choose between putting in place fist/second order good/evil, and eventually teaches us to love the good
  • God is therefore justifies in allowing evil in the universe because it permits the freedom to choose or reject the good- teaches us to be morally responsible
  • God = fourth-order good

SOUL MAKING THEODICY [HICK]

  • Without the evils & pain of suffering we would never have the even greater joys and benefits of being able to show courage, sympathy, love
  • The price of this is that many will reject these goods and will become hateful towards each other

PLANTINGA

  • Morally sufficient reasons why God allows evil to exist:



    • 1) Free will is the greater good "Free will is something of tremendous value"- God couldn't eliminate the evil & suffering because he would in the process eliminate the greater good of Free will

    • 2) Natural evil was caused by humans- "God allowed natural evil to enter the world as part of Adam and eves punishment for their is in the Garden of evil" (brought about disharmony)

CRITICISM

  • MACKIE rejects the FWD it is logically possible for a person to make free, good choices all the timeGod could have created humans so that they would only male free, good choicesGod evidently didn't do soTherefore, either god lacks the power to do so (impotent)He isnt loving enough to do so (malevolent)wither way the FWD fails, therefore God doesnt exist
  • PLANTINGA responds rot maces criticism, defending the FW " it would be impossible to casually determine human actins and at the same time allow them to be morally free"human beings were forced to do. nothing but good, that would represent a denial of human free will God isnt responsable if humans choose to do evil, God is operating under self-imposed constraints that means God won't compel human beings to do good (this would be a denial of FW)

STRENGTHS

  • Plantingas account of FWD shows both his MSR 1 & MSR 2 are logically possible logically possible, so planting refutes Mackie
  • Plantinga is right to insist against Mackie that it would have been logically impossible for God to have created a world which people had free will but never made morally bad choices- even an omnipotent being could not do the logically possible
  • its argued that the FWD cannot explain natural evilaince natural evil is not caused by human free will but there is no doubt that natural evils do bring about second order moral goods such as love, sympathy, compassion
  • FWD establishes 1 crucial principle- that aw world with free creature is miore valuable than a world without them- freedom makes any love, joy, goodness worth having

WEAKNESSESS

  • Even though plantigas MSR 1 & MSR 2 show the FWD is logically coherent-it doesnt show that its truehis explanation that natural evil was brought about by Adam & eve elevates a mythological story to the status of a philosophical argument which its not
  • The FWD relies on a liberation account of free will which holds that although humans are determined by their biology and chemistry, theyrenethertheless free in some way to make choices & decisions
    • This cannot be proved, only assumed
  • It has no convincing response to the evidential problem of evilit is very difficult to reconcile Gods omniscience with the sheer extent of evil- freedom isnt worth the price-tagAt this point of creation, God must have known the full extent of human evil, o why did he bother to create such a universe?
  • satisfactorily explains moral evil- the criminal justice system works on the assumption we have free will
  • ST IRENEUS:
    • humans didn't 'fall' from perfection, God inteltionally created us imperfect
    • This is because throughput our lives, we will grow into perfect beings who are capable of entering heaven I we follow Jesus' example
    • we develop and grow through soul-making into 'children of God'
  • ST AUGUSTINE: All humans are born sinful(original sin) because they inherit sin from Adam and Eve who ate from tree. This explains the cause of evil & suffering we depend on Gods grace to be saved from our sin, not everyone is saved

HICK:

  • Inspired by St Ireneaus who argues humans are created imperfect, but then have to 'rise to perfection' and work towards achieving the 'likeness' of God during their lives on earth The world is a place of SOUL MAKING- therefore has to contain a full range of moral and natural evil so humans can develop virtues such as courage, sympathy empathy & compassion These second order virtues are the qualities by which we become the 'children of god' Our suffering and response to it makes us virtuous & christ-like

EVIL AND SUFFERING ARE INSTRUMENTAL

  • Hick emphasises the idea of God as a father- a father cannot force his children to love him
  • instead children love their parents as a free response to their parents care
  • parents develop their children character by teaching them how to live responsibly within the world
  • God set an epistemic distance between himself and humanity - so human cannot know for sure there is a God
  • This means having a relationship with God is a choice, reflecting the fact a loving relationship is only authentic and valuable when freely chosen

STRENGTHS

  • Epistemic distance can justify any kind of evil by saying its beyond our understanding distance between God & humanity means our knowledge is limited heaven for all justifies the means
  • Its consistent with St Irenaeus' ideas about the purpose of evil ( it has Christin roots)
    • he believed the purpose of god creating this world was soul-making for rational moral agents
    • we are not created perfectly but in a state of imperfection- humans are a work in progress
  • Consistent with evolution and the idea humanity develops over time
    • Darwins theory teaches us that humans physically developed over time
  • similarly hicks theodicy teaches us that our should develop over time
  • it makes sense humans are a 'work in progress'
  • Idea of universal salvation is compatible with beliefs about Gods omnibenevolence
    • Hicks theodicy teaches us that we all ultimately achieve Gods likeness and the perfection necessary to enter heaven
    • this is known as 'universalism'- the idea that everybody ultimately will be saved
    • this is arguably more benevolent than Augustines soul-deciding theodicy where only few will be saved
  • HOWEVER: is it really worth it? why do some people have to face so much suffering than others if we are all going to the same place afterwards anyway?

WEAKNESSESS

  • This theory doesn't justify pointless suffering in the world
    whilst some may actually help us to grow, there is some suffering that appears completely pointless e.g animal sufferingHICKS RESPONSE: EPSITEMIC DISTANCE- pontless suffering is needed to maintain epistemic distance between humanity and god
  • DZ PHILLIPS: theory doesnt justify the quantity of evil in the world- does the end really justify the means? you cannot see evil and suffering as instrumental for a greater goodwe shouldn't use other peoples suffering as a means to an end
  • we cant justify the existence of horrendous evils by simply stating we need to grow deeply in responding to themHICKS RESPONSE: all evils are a matter of degree- if we remove evils like the Holocaust then the next-to-worst evils will seem the very worst
  • The idea of universalism is rejected by some christians-this arguably undermines hocks theodicy According to hicks theodicy, everyone will ultimately be saved. This raises questions with some christians:what's the point of Jesus' sacrificial death and resurrection if everybody can become worthy of salvation on their ownwhat dies this mean for traditional doctrines of election and judgement- will people who cause suffering be saved? what does his mean for the 'sola Christus' principle if were all saved anyway, why go through so much suffering?

PROCESS THEOLOGY [GRIFFIN]

  • if humans were made imago die surely they were made fully perfected rather than simply with this potential HICKS RESPONSE: Genesis says we were made in the image and likeness of God- we were made with this image and then grow into his likeness over time- were created with potential rather than completion

God isnt transcendent and cannot intervene to eliminate evi He cannot intervene to prevent evil- he isnt transcendent and has not created evil instead, as the soul of the universe, he shares all suffering

  • He rejects 'creation out of nothing' - God didnt create the universe out of nothing (Creation ex nihlio)
  • The relationship between God and the universe is panentheistic - universe exists WITHIN god and god exists within the universeGod is the soul of the univers Both universe and God exist eternally and uncreated God 'fashioned' it from pre-existing matter
  • God is powerful, but not omnipotent
    he cant control the physical aspect of the universe any more than the human mind cannot control the internal workings of the bodyGod can PERSUADE chaotic matter into organised forms, over time God doesnt intervene directly (e.g miracles)
  • Evidential problem of evil doesnt arise- God cannot intervene
  • God is not the source of suffering. Instead he shares our suffering as the 'soul' of the universe

STRENGTHS

  • Its a resolution to the logical problem of evil- it establishes that God isnt omnipotent
  • It had a answer to the logical problem of evil. Therefore its not possible to reconcile the existence of God with the existence of evil- he doesnt have the power to control it
    • HOWEVER omnipotence is seen as one of the key characteristics of God by most theists. Its a key teaching from he bible (infallible word of God)
    • is a God who lacks omnipotence worthy of worship?
  • Presents God as close to his people by sharing their suffering (emphasising omnibenevolence) Therefore people feel closer to God which can be a reassurance during times of suffering Aslo takes away the blame potentially given to him

WEAKNESSES

  • Why would he start a process he could not control, especially considering the outcomeIts not clear why he would do this especially id he has omniscience to know the ultimate outcome (quantity of evil and suffering in the universe)HOWEVER God now suffers alongside humanity, so he has empathy
  • Process theology cannot defend the Christian God PT says God is not omnipotent and did not create the world out of nothing- this isnt consistent with main stream Christian thinking and their fails to defend the Christian God
  • [ROTH] If God isnt omnipotent, he is 'weak' and 'pathetic'- not worthy of worship.When somebody arrived at Auchwitz, the best God could do was permit 10 000 Jews a day to go up in smoke- a God of such weakness is pathetic