The Problem with the Problem of Evil
I am arguing that the Logical Problem of Evil (LPE) is not a successful argument to reject the existence of god. This is because the LPE has an inaccurate explanation for the definition of good. I will show that with the correct definition of “good,” an all good and all powerful god can logically exist simultaneously with evil. I will further show that, even if we accept this inaccurate definition of good, this argument will still not constitute the immediate rejection of the existence of god on the basis that god as an all good all knowing all powerful being has given humanity free will. A response to this objection is that humans are not free and are therefore not morally responsible for their actions. …show more content…
God is all good
2. To understand the relative statement of good there must be evil
3. God and evil can both exist simultaneously
I feel as though I must put great emphasis on the meaning of the consistency of the argument. This characteristic is implying that the argument can be true. It does not claim to be certainly true except for the purpose of this paper, I have shown that it is possible for there to be evil in the same universe as God. I do not claim that this proves the existence of God, but rather shows that the LPE fails to successfully disprove the existence of God. Furthermore, a more in-depth version of the argument I have proposed can help strengthen this reasoning. This version of my argument starts with the basic definition of God that has been established earlier in the paper. 1. God is a being that is all powerful, all good, and all knowing.
Given this definition of God, we can make an observation about mankind, and then deduce an obvious statement given 1 and 2 and a statement that we can assume as true:
2. Mankind knows of a being that is all powerful, all good, and all knowing
3. Mankind knows of God
4. If God didn’t want to be known, then he has the power to not be …show more content…
For there to be an all good being it is necessary to have evil.
A response
Why it’s wrong
Free Will A second objection to the LPE is one that has been stated time and time again; the reason that evil exists in a universe that has a God is because that God gave humanity the power of free will. It is also considered good to not back out of something you have promised. If humanity was given free will, by God, to change the world then an all the evil in the world would be justified
Plantinga's Free Will Defense
Reponse:
Strawson makes a very good argument against free will because humans are not ultimately morally responsible for their own actions. This is because humans cannot cause themselves and since a human cannot cause him or herself, a human cannot give free will. In his argument he explains that when we are born we already have a basic personality and features. This is the cause of how genetics work as well as the way our ultimate personality is shaped at a young age through factors that are out of our control.
ME: Although I agree with Strawson that individual human beings do not possess free will, I do not believe that this necessarily means humanity as a whole does not. that is
I am arguing that the Logical Problem of Evil (LPE) is not a successful argument to reject the existence of god. This is because the LPE has an inaccurate explanation for the definition of good. I will show that with the correct definition of “good,” an all good and all powerful god can logically exist simultaneously with evil. I will further show that, even if we accept this inaccurate definition of good, this argument will still not constitute the immediate rejection of the existence of god on the basis that god as an all good all knowing all powerful being has given humanity free will. A response to this objection is that humans are not free and are therefore not morally responsible for their actions. …show more content…
God is all good
2. To understand the relative statement of good there must be evil
3. God and evil can both exist simultaneously
I feel as though I must put great emphasis on the meaning of the consistency of the argument. This characteristic is implying that the argument can be true. It does not claim to be certainly true except for the purpose of this paper, I have shown that it is possible for there to be evil in the same universe as God. I do not claim that this proves the existence of God, but rather shows that the LPE fails to successfully disprove the existence of God. Furthermore, a more in-depth version of the argument I have proposed can help strengthen this reasoning. This version of my argument starts with the basic definition of God that has been established earlier in the paper. 1. God is a being that is all powerful, all good, and all knowing.
Given this definition of God, we can make an observation about mankind, and then deduce an obvious statement given 1 and 2 and a statement that we can assume as true:
2. Mankind knows of a being that is all powerful, all good, and all knowing
3. Mankind knows of God
4. If God didn’t want to be known, then he has the power to not be …show more content…
For there to be an all good being it is necessary to have evil.
A response
Why it’s wrong
Free Will A second objection to the LPE is one that has been stated time and time again; the reason that evil exists in a universe that has a God is because that God gave humanity the power of free will. It is also considered good to not back out of something you have promised. If humanity was given free will, by God, to change the world then an all the evil in the world would be justified
Plantinga's Free Will Defense
Reponse:
Strawson makes a very good argument against free will because humans are not ultimately morally responsible for their own actions. This is because humans cannot cause themselves and since a human cannot cause him or herself, a human cannot give free will. In his argument he explains that when we are born we already have a basic personality and features. This is the cause of how genetics work as well as the way our ultimate personality is shaped at a young age through factors that are out of our control.
ME: Although I agree with Strawson that individual human beings do not possess free will, I do not believe that this necessarily means humanity as a whole does not. that is