Why Does Evil Exist?
Melinda Novak
Philosophy 205
Dr. Julin Grant
16 September 2016
Epicurus once said, “God either cannot or will not prevent evil. If God cannot prevent evil, then God is limited in power. If God will not prevent evil, then God is limited in benevolence. But if God is not limited in either power or benevolence, why is there evil in the world?” In this paper, I will respond to this quote to defend that God is not limited in either power or benevolence and how evil still exists so that we as humans understand what the term good is. I believe that God has the power to prevent evil but chooses not to because he wants us to know the true meaning of being good. God shows us he is all loving by having
…show more content…
If God exists, it is without a doubt within His power to prevent such things like natural disasters. Why wouldn’t He prevent such evil things to happen in our world? Natural evil is the result of God nurturing us. God permits natural evils because it provides humans with the opportunity and drive to develop a Godly character. Because these evils exist in the world, it requires people to be good and peacefully exist with each other in order to effectively respond to the challenge at hand. To have good character, it requires us to be faced with disasters in order to realize what the meaning of good is (Wallace). “The theist may point out that in a world without suffering there would be no occasion for the production of such virtues as courage, sympathy, and the a like” (Page 122). B.C. Johnson is correct in saying this. I, a theist, believe by helping people cope with disasters and supporting them in their time of need, it brings out the good virtues in us and helps us realize how good it is to help others. The best in us often can be seen as people respond in a loving and compassionate way to natural disasters. It is in the moment, of when a disaster strikes, that moral character has the chance to form and grow (Wallace). Good character such as acts of love, compassion and cooperation must be freely chosen. God has given us a world that prompts us to improve our situation of living, tend to those who are in need of our assistance, and become finer human beings throughout the process (Wallace). I believe that God has allowed for natural disasters to happen so we, as people, can recognize the good in ourselves and in
The only thing responsible for evil is the human being. Throughout the whole book, the author struggles with understanding how God could watch the evil taking place. The author loses of his faith, which causes the reader to also question God presence in this tragedy of human events: World War
Even though centuries of human nature say otherwise, the vision of good that is used today is unrealistic because good is demonstrated in the Bible as an unrealistic feat and in the novel Not Wanted on the Voyage by Timothy
“The Problem of Evil” by Peter van Inwagen, is a series of lectures that that presents van Inwagen’s various responses to problem of evil. In this essay, I will present “the local problem of evil” (from chapter 6 of the book), the solution van Inwagen proposes for this problem, and my critique of his solution. “The local problem of evil,” according to van Inwagen, is the hypothetical response an atheist would have towards van Inwagen’s solution of “the global problem of evil” which is, “If god existed, then why is there so much evil in the world?” The argument of “the local problem of evil” is “If god existed then why are there specific horrors that occur in the world, like children dying in a horrific car crash?” The argument that is drawn
God being good, His deeds are perfect. He acts according to His standards, which are beyond human understanding. The will of God should be the cornerstone upon which all actions are
Is a God unable to suppress the evil or does he have no solution to problem of evil? The thesis posited by Mackie that evil exists and there is no God to stop the evil is still relevant to today. We still have wars, incurable diseases and struggles on this planet.
The existence of God has been presented by a multitude of philosophers. However, this has led to profound criticism and arguments of God’s inexistence. The strongest argument in contradiction to God’s existence is the Problem of Evil, presented by J.L Mackie. In this paper, I aim to describe the problem of evil, analyse the objection of the Paradox of Omnipotence and provide rebuttals to this objection. Thus, highlighting my support for Mackie’s Problem of evil.
“The Problem of Evil” is simply the question, why does God allow evil to happen? God is omnipotent, omniscient, all-loving, and rational, therefore why does evil exist? There is either no God or he is not what we think he is, since evil could be prevented by him with no risk. Atheists and anti-theodicist see a problem with the idea that God could prevent evil. They believe that because God is so powerful and perfect, that he would not allow such immoral actions to be done.
If humans are the cause of moral evil, who causes natural evil? Technically natural evil does not have a cause, but rather where did they come from? Connecting this a bit to Paley’s “Argument from Design” organic life probably has a designer, so if natural disasters and diseases are organic life, do they not have a designer, and would that designer not be God? I was just wondering about that and if God could possibly be the cause of some evil. Also, God created humans so is he counted somewhat guilty of the evil in the world because his creations cause it?
The problem of evil takes into account three defining features of God: all-good, all-knowing, and all-powerful and questions whether such a God would permit evil and not interfere. Sinnott-Armstrong discusses his stance by countering responses he coins as the Glorious Response, the Modest Response, and the Overriding Response. Whereas, Craig counters the arguments made by Sinnott-Armstrong. The Glorious Response Thus response suggests evil is
At the beginning of the article, Mackie states that the initial issue with God’s existence is that, “God is omnipotent; God is wholly good; and yet evil exists” (Mackie, Paragraph 3). If god is such a pure and good being, then he should be able to combat all evil. The first statement that showcases that God is omnipotent, God is wholly good, then evil cannot possibly exist. The definition of omnipotent is
Although everyone has the capacity to act good, there is also evil within everyone and it is only
The devil is the supreme being of all evil. The villain, once called Lucifer and was the greatest of all angels l, rebelled against God over his jealousy of man. Turning evil and fighting the Almighty, he was destined to lose and thrown out of heaven, along with his army. In Dante’s Inferno, he resides in the deepest bowels of hell, where he tortures the three worst traitors in human history: Judas Iscariot, betrayer of Jesus of Nazareth, Cassius and Brutus, slayers Julius Caesar. In hell, contrapasso rules, and the appearances of the fallen angel Lucifer agrees with it.
All creatures in this world have an ability to do whatever it is willing to do. As an illustration, a mother uses drugs, yells at her son every day, forces him to do what he does not want to, and also violently abuses him. One day, that boy kills his mother. That is murder, and that is evil. God might see that, but he let it happen due to two possibilities.
He describes the objection as, “all men desire the apparent good, but have no control over the appearance, but the end appears to each man in a form answering to his character” (1114b). This view argues that all people pursue that which seems good, but some people cannot see the true good, which is out of their control. The immediate implication of this objection, if it is indeed true, suggests that “no one is responsible for his own evildoing” (1114b).
Can we consider people as Good or Evil? People can be defined as neither good nor evil because many factors lead to us being a mixture of both. One of these factors is that we only have one perspective of life and the actions they do. This means we don 't have all the information to be able to form an opinion on them. Another factor is that we are unable to measure how good or bad an action is.