PHIL 101 - The Problem of Evil L5

Lecture Overview

• Course: PHIL 101 - Mind and Reality

• Lecture 5: The Problem of Evil

• Instructor: Dr. Tosh Stewart

Lecture Outline

• Administrative matters

• The argument from evil

• Exploring inconsistency and reductio

• Responses to the argument from evil

• The concept that good needs evil

• Means-end justifications

• Higher goods

• The role of Freewill

What is Evil?

• Definition: Evil refers to actions, states, or conditions that produce significant wrongdoing, injustice, pain, or suffering. The philosophical discussion of evil often raises moral questions and engages metaphysical assumptions about existence.

• Types of Evil:

  • Natural Evil: Refers to suffering caused by non-agent actions, which often leads to significant harm to living beings. Examples include natural disasters like Cyclone Gabriel, pandemics, and ecological catastrophes. Natural evils challenge the belief in a benevolent deity who has the power to prevent such occurrences.

  • Moral Evil: Involves wrongful acts committed by agents that lead to suffering. This includes heinous acts such as child abuse, mass killings, torture, and other forms of human rights violations. Moral evils raise questions about individual accountability and the nature of human freedom.

• Puzzling Nature of Evil: The existence of evil raises profound questions regarding the nature of a morally perfect, omnipotent God. It creates a philosophical tension that is central to discussions in the philosophy of religion, leading to challenges for theists trying to reconcile God's existence with observable suffering in the world.

The Argument from Evil

• Basic Claim:

  1. God is defined as an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent being.

  2. Evil exists, an assertion supported by observable phenomena in the world.

• Conclusion:
  Therefore, at least one of the attributes of God (omnipotence, omniscience, or omnibenevolence) must be false to make sense of the existing evidence of evil.

Inconsistency

• Understanding Inconsistency: A set of propositions cannot be collectively true if they lead to contradictory conclusions, suggesting a framework that must be re-evaluated to resolve the inconsistency.

• Reductio ad Absurdum: This is a logical technique often used to demonstrate inconsistency. It involves showing that if a proposition leads to a logically impossible conclusion, one must reject at least one of the original premises.

Inconsistent Tetrad

• Propositions:

  1. God exists as an omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good being.

  2. Evil exists.

  3. A perfectly good being would eliminate evil whenever possible.

  4. An omnipotent being has no limits.

• Epicurus: The philosopher Epicurus raises a significant dilemma centered on God’s willingness and ability to prevent evil, inviting deep exploration of theological implications.

The Reductio Argument

• Structure:

  1. If God exists, there would be no evil in the world.

  2. God exists.

  3. Therefore, there is no evil.

• Conclusion: If the conclusion is false (i.e., we observe evil), then at least one premise must be false, challenging traditional understandings of the divine.

Formulation of the Argument from Evil

• Positive Formulation:

  1. Terrible suffering exists in the world and is widely recognized.

  2. An all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-loving God would prevent unnecessary suffering.

• Conclusion:
  Therefore, such a God likely does not exist, or our understanding of divine attributes needs revising.

Denying God’s Attributes

• Moral Goodness: Defining God with attributes of omnipotence, omniscience, and moral imperfection leads to philosophical contradictions that challenge foundational theistic beliefs.

• Knowledge and Power Limitations: Recognizing the existence of evil in the world suggests significant limitations on what God can know or influence, challenging beliefs in divine sovereignty.

Theistic Responses to the Argument from Evil

1. Good Cannot Exist Without Evil:

   • The position posits that evil is necessary for good to exist, prompting examination of the coexistence of good and evil within a moral framework. This view raises further questions regarding the nature of God's omnipotence.

   • It challenges perceptions of why God would allow any form of evil, even minuscule, if it serves a purpose.

2. Means-End Justification:

   • This argument posits that certain evils can be justified if they lead to a greater good, such as developing resilience or character through adversity.

   • Critique: The dependency on causal connections is often questioned, as an omnipotent God would not require suffering to achieve good outcomes.

3. Higher Goods:

   • Some virtues, such as heroism, charity, and compassion, are argued to necessitate the existence of suffering.

   • Logical Necessity: It is posited that a world characterized by compassion cannot exist in the absence of suffering, suggesting that some degree of evil is integral for certain moral goods.

4. Best Possible World Defense:

   • Originating from Leibniz, this perspective holds that God created the optimal balance of good and evil, where the presence of evil fosters conditions for the emergence of higher goods.

5. Free Will Theodicy:

   • This argument suggests that evil arises from the actions of free agents (humans) and that God values human free will so highly that He allows individuals to choose between good and evil.

   • However, preventing certain evils would imply an infringement on human freedom, leading to further ethical dilemmas.

Addressing Natural Evil

• Natural Evils Explained:

  • A distinction is often drawn from moral evils; natural evils are frequently attributed to supernatural agents (e.g., demonic influences) in certain theistic beliefs, offering a framework for understanding natural disasters and other non-agent caused suffering.

Revisiting the Inconsistent Tetrad

• Reformulation of terms is encouraged in discussions regarding gratuitous evil to clarify the implications of suffering within theological debates.

Conclusion

• A thorough examination of how the existence of evil interacts with the notion of God’s existence is crucial.

• Theodicies: These are frameworks developed to reconcile the existence of evil with God’s benevolence, elucidating various reasons why an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent God would permit evil in the world, and prompting profound philosophical inquiries into the nature of morality and existence.