Formulation and detailed arguments Problem of evil

1 formulation , detailed arguments

1.1 logical problem of evil

1.1.1 theism forgoes absolute omniscience, omnipotence, or omnibenevolence


1.2 evidential problem of evil
1.3 problem of evil , animal suffering

formulation , detailed arguments

the problem of evil refers challenge of reconciling belief in omniscient, omnipotent, , omnibenevolent god, existence of evil , suffering in world. problem may described either experientially or theoretically. experiential problem difficulty in believing in concept of loving god when confronted suffering or evil in real world, such epidemics, or wars, or murder, or rape or terror attacks wherein innocent children, women, men or loved 1 becomes victim. problem of evil theoretical one, described , studied religion scholars in 2 varieties: logical problem , evidential problem.

logical problem of evil

originating greek philosopher epicurus, logical argument evil follows:

this argument of form modus tollens, , logically valid: if premises true, conclusion follows of necessity. show first premise plausible, subsequent versions tend expand on it, such modern example:

both of these arguments understood presenting 2 forms of logical problem of evil. attempt show assumed propositions lead logical contradiction , therefore cannot correct. philosophical debate has focused on propositions stating god cannot exist with, or want prevent, evils (premises 3 , 6), defenders of theism (for example, leibniz) arguing god exist , allow evil in order achieve greater good.

theism forgoes absolute omniscience, omnipotence, or omnibenevolence

if god lacks 1 of these qualities—omniscience, omnipotence, or omnibenevolence—then logical problem of evil can resolved. process theology , open theism other positions limit god s omnipotence and/or omniscience (as defined in traditional theology). dystheism belief god not wholly good.

evidential problem of evil

william l. rowe s example of natural evil: in distant forest lightning strikes dead tree, resulting in forest fire. in fire fawn trapped, horribly burned, , lies in terrible agony several days before death relieves suffering. rowe cites example of human evil innocent child victim of violence , thereby suffers.

the evidential version of problem of evil (also referred probabilistic or inductive version), seeks show existence of evil, although logically consistent existence of god, counts against or lowers probability of truth of theism. example, critic of plantinga s idea of mighty nonhuman spirit causing natural evils may concede existence of such being not logically impossible argue due lacking scientific evidence existence unlikely , unconvincing explanation presence of natural evils. both absolute versions , relative versions of evidential problems of evil presented below.

a version william l. rowe:

another paul draper:

problem of evil , animal suffering

the problem of evil has been extended beyond human suffering, include suffering of animals cruelty, disease , evil. 1 version of problem includes animal suffering natural evil, such violence , fear faced animals predators, natural disasters, on history of evolution. referred darwinian problem of evil, after charles darwin expressed follows:

sufferings of millions of lower animals throughout endless time apparently irreconcilable existence of creator of unbounded goodness.

the second version of problem of evil applied animals, , avoidable suffering experienced them, 1 caused human beings, such animal cruelty or when shot or slaughtered. version of problem of evil has been used scholars including john hick counter responses , defenses problem of evil such suffering being means perfect morals , greater because animals innocent, helpless, amoral sentient victims. scholar michael almeida said perhaps serious , difficult version of problem of evil. problem of evil in context of animal suffering, states almeida, can stated as:

^ cite error: named reference iepevidential invoked never defined (see page).
^ cite error: named reference harvey2013p141 invoked never defined (see page).
^ gregory a. boyd (2003), god blame? (intervarsity press), isbn 978-0830823949, pp. 55–58
^ peter van inwagen (2008). problem of evil. oxford university press. pp. 22, 26–30, 6–10. isbn 978-0-19-954397-7. 
^ linda edwards (2001). brief guide beliefs: ideas, theologies, mysteries, , movements. westminster john knox press. p. 59. isbn 978-0-664-22259-8. 
^ john swinton (2007). raging compassion: pastoral responses problem of evil. wm. b. eerdmans. pp. 33–35, 119, 143. isbn 978-0-8028-2997-9. 
^ susan neiman (2004). evil in modern thought: alternative history of philosophy. princeton university press. pp. 119–20, 318–22. isbn 978-0691117928. 
^ micha de winter (2012). socialization , civil society. springer. pp. 69–70. isbn 978-94-6209-092-7. 
^ formulation may have been wrongly attributed epicurus lactantius, who, christian perspective, regarded epicurus atheist. according mark joseph larrimore, (2001), problem of evil, pp. xix–xxi. wiley-blackwell. according reinhold f. glei, settled argument of theodicy academical source not not epicurean, anti-epicurean. reinhold f. glei, et invidus et inbecillus. das angebliche epikurfragment bei laktanz, de ira dei 13, 20–21, in: vigiliae christianae 42 (1988), pp. 47–58
^ rowe, william l. (1979). problem of evil , varieties of atheism . american philosophical quarterly. 16: 336–37. 
^ draper, paul (1989). pain , pleasure: evidential problem theists . noûs. noûs, vol. 23, no. 3. 23 (3): 331–50. doi:10.2307/2215486. jstor 2215486. 
^ peter van inwagen (2008). problem of evil. oxford university press. pp. 120, 123–26, context: 120–33. isbn 978-0-19-954397-7. 
^ nicola hoggard creegan (2013). animal suffering , problem of evil. oxford university press. pp. 44–55. isbn 978-0-19-993185-9. 
^ michael murray (2008). nature red in tooth , claw: theism , problem of animal suffering. oxford university press. p. 8. isbn 978-0-19-155327-1. 
^ michael j. almeida (2012). freedom, god, , worlds. oxford university press. pp. 193–94. isbn 978-0-19-964002-7. 
^ michael murray (2008). nature red in tooth , claw: theism , problem of animal suffering. oxford university press. p. 2. isbn 978-0-19-155327-1. 
^ diogenes allen (1990). marilyn mccord adams , robert merrihew adams, ed. problem of evil. oxford university press. pp. 204–06. isbn 978-0-19-824866-8. 
^ william l. rowe (2007). william l. rowe on philosophy of religion: selected writings. ashgate. pp. 61–64 (the fawn s suffering example). isbn 978-0-7546-5558-9. 
^ michael j. almeida (2012). freedom, god, , worlds. oxford university press. pp. 194–95, complete context , alternate formulations see pages 194–217. isbn 978-0-19-964002-7. 

cite error: there <ref group=note> tags on page, references not show without {{reflist|group=note}} template (see page).