The problem of evil

1
The problem of evil

• Philosophy of Religion 2008
• Lecture 5

2
Procedural work

• Draft exam answers complete in an hour!
• Handwritten is fine, but do give references
• Does the soul-making theodicy provide an
  satisfactory answer to the problem of evil?
• Is divine hiddenness essential to human freedom?
• Is there a logical problem of evil for the
  theist?
• If the universe shows evidence of design, does
  this prove the existence of God?
• Hand in by 4pm Friday Week 8.

3
Today

• A forgotten proof? Franklins beer proof (!)
• Two problems of evil
• The logical problem
• The evidential problem
• the coherence of theism and the existence of God
• Selected theistic responses
• Opposition to theodicy

4
Problems of evil 1

• The logical problem a problem of consistency
• If God is good and omnipotent and omniscient
• There shouldnt be human and animal suffering
• But there is inconsistency?
• Which premise will the theist give up ?
• (See Hume DCNR Part X)

5
The logical problem

• Mackie (Evil and omnipotence) God is
  omnipotent, God is wholly good, yet evil exists
  the theologian it seems at once must adhere, and
  yet cannot consistently adhere to all three
• Strictly, to produce inconsistency, need added
  premise(s). E.g.
• An omnipotent God can do anything
• Good must always seek to eliminate evil

6
Pause for clarification

• Suffering as evil, or as the result of evil so
  evils/suffering interchangeable
• Evils
• Moral resulting from human action/inaction
• Natural resulting from other causes
• God as good or God as loving?
• These last two may affect the sort of defence the
  theist can mount

7
The logical problem

• Possible defences for the theist?
• The theist may simply deny one of the premises
  (unattractive)
• More likely to point out that
• These premises need to be understood in a certain
  way, or
• The hidden premises (omnipotence all powerful,
  goodness must oppose evil) are wrong

8
Possible defences

• So perhaps
• God is not good in our sense of morally good
• Evil does not exist
• Or
• God has reasons for allowing evil (goodness will
  not always seek to overcome evil)
• God has created the world in such a way that he
  cannot intervene

9
God not good?

• Does calling God good mean morally good
• Goodness is not always a moral property
• It may be a expression of gratitude..?
• Can God be subject to moral judgment?
• God can no more be part of a moral community
  with his creatures than he can be part of a
  political community with them (Kenny, What is
  Faith?)
• Does the same apply to loving ?

10
Evil doesnt exist?

• Aquinas evil is not a positive quality
• It is a certain absence of a good (Summa
  Theologiae - cf. discussion of omnipotence)
• So God cannot cause evil but does he therefore
  permit this absence to occur?
• Augustine evil as the name for nothing but the
  want of good (City of God Bk XI)
• And this want arises from the fall, original sin

11
The free will defence

• And note, the fall arises from human choice
• Allowing choice seems to limit Gods power
• Challenges the hidden assumptions
• An omnipotent God can do anything
• Good must always seek to eliminate evil
• Greater good defences goods which cannot be
  achieved without allowing (possibility of) evil

12
The free will defence

• It is good to have free agents, and so it is good
  to allow agents freedom
• God cannot let us be free and ensure we chose
  good (incompatibilism)
• And so God must allow us to do evil
• Plantinga thus is the power of an omnipotent
  God limited by the freedom he confers upon his
  creatures

13
The free will defence

• But what relationship between God and freedom?
• Is God still responsible for the actions of free
  agents?
• Since he created them, and sustains them
• (Aquinas) God is not a worldly cause, so he can
  bring human actions without limiting freedom
  (compatibilism)
• But is this plausible?

14
The free will defence

• General problem is the good worth the evil?
• Maybe if the free creatures do more good than
  evil?
• Can our free will account for natural evils?
• As they affect both us and other creatures
• Should they be laid at Gods door?
• Or the fall/original sin (Augustine, van Inwagen)

15
Free will and natural evils

• Maybe being able to enjoy free will depends on
  the existence of natural laws, that will not
  always work in our interests
• We cannot all get what we want what decides the
  matter will be certain natural facts (Mawson)
• But what can this say about other creatures
  suffering the fawn in the forest fire (Rowe)
• Do all creatures have free will?

16
Overcoming evils

• The worst evils demand to be defeated by the
  best goods. Horrendous evils can be overcome only
  by the goodness of God (Marilyn Adams).
• We may not fathom the reasons for evil
• but Gods ensures that each persons life is a
  good to them, by engulfing evils.
• God is still good, despite evils
• Transcendent goods relations with God Gods
  gratitude identification with Christ

17
Problems of evil 2

• Or an evidential problem (Mackie MoT, Rowe)
• If there were an omni God
• There would not be evil/suffering
• But there is
• So there cannot be such a God (modus tollens)
• Suffering as evidence for atheism - not proof,
  but supports a strong presumption (Mackie)

18
The evidential problem

• A Bayesian approach (e.g Draper in Copan and
  Meister)
• This evidence may increase the balance of
  probability of Gods non-existence
• By increasing the antecedent probability of
  atheism, prior to our considering any further
  arguments

19
Some responses

• We know that God exists for some other reason
• so while this presents a problem, it cannot
  count as evidence against His existence
• We dont see the whole picture
• Not having Gods omniscience, all the evidence is
  not available to us
• Relies on first point? Otherwise we can judge
  only on evidence we have
• Combines with greater good theodicies?

20
Defences and theodicies

• Defences challenging one of the premises of the
  argument
• Theodicy (after Leibniz) explaining why God
  might act in a certain way
• Not always an easy distinction to draw
• And defences may work against both forms of
  argument, or only against one careful!

21
Greater good arguments

• Is the existence of evil necessary to bring about
  a greater good (cf free-will)? No gratuitous
  evil?
• Hick soul-making/Iranean theodicy
• God intends to bring us to moral/spiritual
  maturity
• This must be a free choice epistemic distance
• A world without problems would be morally
  static
• So to grow, we must live in a world with evil
• But could we not learn virtues in a good world?

22
Greater good arguments

• Swinburne if we are to become morally mature
• we must act freely, and have knowledge of the
  consequences of actions, both good and evil
• Again, we cannot be force-fed this we must work
  it out inductively
• and this means both bringing about moral evil
  and having experience of natural evils

23
Against theodicy

• Are greater good arguments too anthropocentric
• Or not respectful of suffering humans, animals?
• Responses
• Acknowledge our lack of understanding if God
  is there, he is surely something bigger and more
  mysterious than a corrupt or stupid official
  (Midgley see also DZ Phillips)
• God as human love and effort (Soelle)
• Are theodicies besides the point ?

24
References/additional reading

• Seminar readings
• Davies Introduction Ch3 (2nd edn) or 10 (3rd edn)
• Davies Guide Part V
• Mackie Evil and omnipotence (Mind 64,
  Peterson)
• Mackie Miracle of Theism Ch.9
• Rowe The problem of evil and some varieties of
  atheism (Taliaferro Griffiths)
• Augustine City of God Bk XI (or passages in
  Peterson, Davies, Hick Ch.2)

25
References/additional reading

• Hume Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion Part X
• Swinburne Existence of God Ch.11, or Stump
  Murray Ch.25
• Hick An Iranean theodicy (in Hick, Peterson)
• Adams Horrendous evils and the goodness of God
  (in Stump Murray, Taliaferro Griffiths)
• Midgley Wickedness (extracts in Taliaferro
  Griffiths)
• Against theodicy see Clack and Clack Chapter 3.

26
Questions

• Can you distinguish the various defences and
  theodicies?
• Which do you think are the strongest?
• Can we combine approaches to give a complete
  defence of Gods existence in the face of both
  moral and natural evils?