Defining evil

Physical and emotional pain and suffering or deprivation and their causes

Some Categories: Passive evil--physical and emotional pain and suffering or deprivation (lacking freedom is an evil even if it is not continuously experienced as physically or psychologically painful)

Some Categories: Passive evil--physical and emotional pain and suffering or deprivation (lacking freedom is an evil even if it is not continuously experienced as physically or psychologically painful) Active evil--the causes of pain, suffering, and deprivation

Some Categories: Passive evil--physical and emotional pain and suffering or deprivation (lacking freedom is an evil even if it is not continuously experienced as physically or psychologically painful) Active evil--the causes of pain, suffering, and deprivation Moral evil--actions taken that cause suffering or left undone that would have alleviated it.

Some Categories: Passive evil--physical and emotional pain and suffering or deprivation (lacking freedom is an evil even if it is not continuously experienced as physically or psychologically painful) Active evil--the causes of pain, suffering, and deprivation Moral evil--actions taken that cause suffering or left undone that would have alleviated it. Natural evil--events in the natural world that cause pain and suffering

Some qualifications:

Natural evil is often mixed with and made worse by human choices (populating areas prone to natural disaster--hurricanes, wildfires--is in part a result of human choices, though perhaps not the totally free choice of those living in the dangerous areas).

Some qualifications: Natural evil is often mixed with and made worse by human choices (populating areas prone to natural disaster--hurricanes, wildfires--is in part a result of human choices, though perhaps not the totally free choice of those living in the dangerous areas). Human actions or inaction that results in suffering often does so unintentionally--ignorance. Is suffering that results from ignorance an instance of moral evil (we should have known better) or an instance of natural evil (human ignorance is a fact of nature rather like volcanic activity)?

Some qualifications: Natural evil is often mixed with and made worse by human choices (populating areas prone to natural disaster--hurricanes, wildfires--is in part a result of human choices, though perhaps not the totally free choice of those living in the dangerous areas). Human actions or inaction that results in suffering often does so unintentionally--ignorance. Is suffering that results from ignorance an instance of moral evil (we should have known better) or an instance of natural evil (human ignorance is a fact of nature rather like volcanic activity)? Some suffering results from countless small, perhaps legitimate acts-- structural evil

Responding to the challenge of evil First response--frame the question as: What good is evil?

Responding to the challenge of evil First response--frame the question as: What good is evil? Suffering is bad in itself, but it can lead to greater good. It has instrumental value.

Responding to the challenge of evil First response--frame the question as: What good is evil? Suffering is bad in itself, but it can lead to greater good. It has instrumental value. This could account for natural evil: Developing virtue requires facing challenges. God created a challenging environment so that we could develop these virtues.

Challenges to the “instrumental” defense

There is often no correspondence between particular instances of suffering and character development. Indeed some suffering is so intense that it leads to permanent psychological damage, making character development impossible. There is superfluous, unredeemed evil.

Challenges to the “instrumental” defense There is often no correspondence between particular instances of suffering and character development. Indeed some suffering is so intense that it leads to permanent psychological damage, making character development impossible. There is superfluous, unredeemed evil. Does virtue require challenge?

Challenges to the “instrumental” defense There is often no correspondence between particular instances of suffering and character development. Indeed some suffering is so intense that it leads to permanent psychological damage, making character development impossible. There is superfluous, unredeemed evil. Does virtue require challenge? Can virtue be learned without challenge?

Challenges to the “instrumental” defense There is often no correspondence between particular instances of suffering and character development. Indeed some suffering is so intense that it leads to permanent psychological damage, making character development impossible. There is superfluous, unredeemed evil. Does virtue require challenge? Can virtue be learned without challenge? Is virtue gained through struggle better than virtue simply given?

Challenges to the “instrumental” defense There is often no correspondence between particular instances of suffering and character development. Indeed some suffering is so intense that it leads to permanent psychological damage, making character development impossible. There is superfluous, unredeemed evil. Does virtue require challenge? Can virtue be learned without challenge? Is virtue gained through struggle better than virtue simply given? Is struggled-for virtue worth all this pain?

Instrumental defense in summary: Suffering can have good results—maybe this is why God allows it.

Instrumental defense in summary: Suffering can have good results—maybe this is why God allows it. But why allow the suffering that doesn’t have good results—and maybe can’t?

Instrumental defense in summary: Suffering can have good results—maybe this is why God allows it. But why allow the suffering that doesn’t have good results—and maybe can’t? And why not just make us with these good characteristics rather than use suffering to develop them?

We’ve considered a possible explanation for natural evil--the instrumental value of pain and suffering. What about moral evil--human choices that result in pain and suffering?

Moral Evil

The importance of freedom--the Free Will Defense

Moral Evil The importance of freedom--the Free Will Defense Freedom requires the ability to do otherwise--to freely do good requires the ability to do evil

Moral Evil The importance of freedom--the Free Will Defense Freedom requires the ability to do otherwise--to freely do good requires the ability to do evil Human freedom is so important to God that God risked that we would do evil in order to insure the good that we be free.

Some questions and concerns about the nature and value of freedom:

God didn’t risk that we would do evil. God is omniscient, so God knew, at creation, that we would do evil. And went ahead with it.

Some questions and concerns about the nature and value of freedom: God didn’t risk that we would do evil. God is omniscient, so God knew, at creation, that we would do evil. And went ahead with it. Is the ability to do otherwise really necessary for freedom? Can I freely choose what I was destined to do?

Some questions and concerns about the nature and value of freedom: God didn’t risk that we would do evil. God is omniscient, so God knew, at creation, that we would do evil. And went ahead with it. Is the ability to do otherwise really necessary for freedom? Can I freely choose what I was destined to do? Is the relationship between freedom and evil something God was bound by or a relationship that God created?

Some questions and concerns about the nature and value of freedom: God didn’t risk that we would do evil. God is omniscient, so God knew, at creation, that we would do evil. And went ahead with it. Is the ability to do otherwise really necessary for freedom? Can I freely choose what I was destined to do? Is the relationship between freedom and evil something God was bound by or a relationship that God created? Why are freely good beings so much more valuable than beings determined to be good? I’ve tried to raise my kids so that goodness is second-nature, not something they have to consciously choose each time. That early shaping wasn’t their choice, and their actions now are a result of that shaping. Are they freely good (assuming they are good)?

Some questions and concerns about the nature and value of freedom: God didn’t risk that we would do evil. God is omniscient, so God knew, at creation, that we would do evil. And went ahead with it. Is the ability to do otherwise really necessary for freedom? Can I freely choose what I was destined to do? Is the relationship between freedom and evil something God was bound by or a relationship that God created? Why are freely good beings so much more valuable than beings determined to be good? I’ve tried to raise my kids so that goodness is second-nature, not something they have to consciously choose each time. That early shaping wasn’t their choice, and their actions now are a result of that shaping. Are they freely good (assuming they are good)? Why not intervene is the extreme cases? In general freedom is valuable. But is it so valuable that God might not have intervened in a few individual choices that resulted in massive suffering?

How shall we think about structural evil?

Often massive evil is only possible if countless individually justifiable actions contribute.

How shall we think about structural evil? Often massive evil is only possible if countless individually justifiable actions contribute. The German railroad switch operator in 1942 is just trying to keep his family fed and housed through very hard times. But his work is part of a larger system that is contributing to the murder of millions.

How shall we think about structural evil? Often massive evil is only possible if countless individually justifiable actions contribute. The German railroad switch operator in 1942 is just trying to keep his family fed and housed through very hard times. But his work is part of a larger system that is contributing to the murder of millions. Parents understandably want the best education (safest neighborhood, etc) for their kids. But the good schools/safe neighborhoods are often in areas too expensive for low-income families. When middle class families leave economically mixed areas, they pull resources from those schools leaving them worse for the low- income kids left behind. (White flight)

How shall we think about structural evil? Often massive evil is only possible if countless individually justifiable actions contribute. The German railroad switch operator in 1942 is just trying to keep his family fed and housed through very hard times. But his work is part of a larger system that is contributing to the murder of millions. Parents understandably want the best education (safest neighborhood, etc) for their kids. But the good schools/safe neighborhoods are often in areas too expensive for low-income families. When middle class families leave economically mixed areas, they pull resources from those schools leaving them worse for the low- income kids left behind. (White flight) I understandably try to save money on clothing (food, household items, etc) and as a result I end up buying clothes sewn by exploited labor.

In such cases, evil seems to be inherent in the very structure of society, and less easily identifiable with individual human choices.

Do either of the approaches we’ve considered--virtue requires struggle, or genuine goodness requires the freedom to do evil--address structural evil?

Reading for next week Vel Ch 5 William James Will to Believe