Problem of evil
The problem of evil is the question of how evil and suffering can exist if God is all-good and all-powerful. It is one of the most serious challenges to belief in God.[1]
Kinds of evil
Philosophers distinguish three kinds of evil:[1]
- natural evil
- moral evil
- theological evil
All of them raise the same challenge for belief in an all-good, all-powerful God.
The question is not only abstract. Ian M. Church opens his discussion with the Black Death, and with the personal, existential problem of feeling that God is hidden in times of suffering.[2]
Traditional responses
Theists have answered the problem in several ways:[1]
- Many point to original sin.
- The philosopher Plotinus, and later Augustine and Aquinas, described evil as a privation: not a thing in its own right, but an absence of good.
- The French philosopher Gabriel Marcel treated evil as a mystery in which we ourselves participate, rather than as a puzzle to be solved.
Skeptical theism
One modern debate concerns "evidential" arguments from evil, which say that the evils we see are evidence against God. The philosopher Wykstra argued that we should not expect to know God's reasons for permitting evil, so our failure to see such reasons proves little. Paul Draper coined the term "skeptical theist" for this kind of view in 1996 and criticised van Inwagen's version. In 2014 Draper argued that ignorance of God's reasons does not weaken the evidence that comes from the evils themselves.[3]
Rethinking God's goodness
Some philosophers approach the problem by questioning what God's perfection involves.
- Mark C. Murphy argues that moral perfection is not necessarily one of God's perfections: being all-powerful, all-knowing, perfectly rational and free does not by itself give God reasons to promote creatures' good. He concludes that arguments from evil need an account of what motivates God, though they might still rely on God being morally perfect in fact.[4]
- Tim Mulgan proposes a God who is morally perfect but has no special concern for humans, which he claims dissolves the problem.[5]
- Paul Draper's "panpsychotheism" includes the hope that God could save us from death without being to blame for our needing to be saved.[6]
Divine hiddenness
A related argument concerns not suffering but silence. Schellenberg argues that some people capable of relating to God do not believe, through no fault of their own; a perfectly loving God would prevent that; so no such God exists.[2]
In Zoroastrianism
Zoroastrianism offers a very different picture. It sees the world as a contest between truth and the Lie (druj), and in later texts the Lie rules in the domain of the hostile spirit Angra Mainyu. In 449 CE a Persian edict to the Armenians set out this dualism and rejected the idea of a God who creates both good and evil.[7][8]
See also
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 "Evil". Philosophy of Religion A-Z. Palgrave Macmillan. 2016. p. 74.
- ↑ 2.0 2.1 Pritchard, Duncan; Harris, Mark (2017). "Chapter 6 (Ian M. Church)". Philosophy, Science and Religion for Everyone. Routledge.
- ↑ Draper, Paul, ed. (2019). "Supplemental Guide". Current Controversies in Philosophy of Religion. Routledge.
- ↑ Draper, Paul, ed. (2019). "Is an Absolutely Perfect Being Morally Perfect? (Mark C. Murphy)". Current Controversies in Philosophy of Religion. Routledge.
- ↑ Draper, Paul, ed. (2019). "Alternatives to Benevolent Theism (Tim Mulgan)". Current Controversies in Philosophy of Religion. Routledge.
- ↑ Draper, Paul, ed. (2019). "Panpsychotheism (Paul Draper)". Current Controversies in Philosophy of Religion. Routledge.
- ↑ Rose, Jenny (2014). "Zoroastrians Present and Past". Zoroastrianism: An Introduction. I.B. Tauris.
- ↑ Rose, Jenny (2014). "Eranshahr: The Sasanian Center of the World". Zoroastrianism: An Introduction. I.B. Tauris.