Problems of evil

 Natural and moral  Moral evil: evil which results from a moral agent misusing his or her freewill such that the agent is blameworthy for it. It includes human actions as well as character traits.  Natural evil: evil which results from natural phenomena and is not brought about by the free will of a moral agent. It includes natural disasters and certain human illnesses.

 Horrendous and gratuitous  Gratuitous evil: evil in the form of suffering that is preventable and pointless. Examples: a woman diagnosed with cancer; a daughter killed by her mother’s automobile; a fawn trapped in a fire.  Horrendous evil: evil which, when experienced by someone, gives that person reason to doubt that their life, as experienced, could be taken to be a great good for them on the whole. Example: a woman who is raped, dismembered, starved, and forced to choose which of her children will die at the hands of terrorists.

1. If God exists, then God is all-powerful, all- knowing, and wholly-good 2. An all-powerful being would have the power to eliminate evil 3. An all-knowing being would have the knowledge to eliminate evil 4. A wholly-good being would have the desire to eliminate evil 5. An all-powerful, all-knowing, and wholly- good being would eliminate evil 6. Evil exists 7. Therefore, God does not exist

 Draper’s objection: establishing that the existence of a particular evil and the existence of God are incompatible cannot be accomplished  Plantinga’s free will defense: it is possible that God would desire to create a world which contains evil if moral goodness requires free moral creatures

Shortened form: 1. If an all-knowing, all-powerful, and wholly-good God exists, then such a God could and would create the best of all possible worlds 2. Due to the existence of evil in the world, it is improbable that this is the best of all possible worlds 3. Thus, it is improbable that God exists

 Leibniz’s lapse: if persons have libertarian free will then there are certain worlds that even an all powerful being could not create  There cannot be a best of all possible worlds, for we could always think of one more good thing to add to that world

ArgumentObjections 1. Large amounts of evil exist which God, an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent being, could have prevented without losing some greater good or permitting some equally bad or worse evil 2. God would have prevented the evils which exist, unless God could not do so without losing some greater good or permitting some equally bad or worse evil 3. Therefore, God does not exist  We cannot make moral judgments about God  God can use evil and suffering for our good  Open theism and gratuitous evil are compatible

 Problem  The existential feel of certain kinds of evil sometimes leads to disbelief in God or religious belief in general  Reply  The problem is not an argument

Theodicy: an attempt to justify God and God’s ways given the existence of evil in a world created by God.  Augustine’s free will theodicy  Hick’s Irenaean (soul-making) theodicy  A process theodicy

 Which of the theoretical problems of evil do you find most compelling? Are the solutions offered satisfactory? Explain.  Is evil a problem for the atheist? Why or why not?  Explore the way a particular non-theistic worldview accounts for evil and suffering. What are some similarities with this way of understanding evil and suffering and theistic descriptions? What are some differences?