Hume And Swinburne's Problem Of Evil

There are many debates on problem of evil in the world. David Hume and Richard Swinburne agree there are two categories of evil in the world. The moral evils, which are evils which people commit upon each other, and natural evils, which are evils that derive from natural sources like bad weather conditions. In the following paragraphs I will discuss the arguments which Hume presents about the problems of evil in the world, and how this evil is opposed to a divine benevolent God. We will also discuss the criticism that Swinburne produces on Hume’s arguments. In Dialogue Concerning Natural Religion by Hume touches on a couple factors of evil through the characters Demea, Philo, and Cleanthes. Demea states that evil is: “the miseries of life the unhappiness of man the general corruptions of our nature the unsatisfactory enjoyment of pleasures, riches, honours” (41)
Demea and Philo then elaborate more on the effects of evil through their dialogue. They note in their conversation even animals suffer because they are constantly preying or being preyed upon. How they feel pain and a result of this pain is inevitable misery. This misery is not isolated to animals, even though humans rule the animal …show more content…
He states that the main reason that God allows evil in the world is to allow the free will of humans. Without evil, all humans would only know good. Human life would be conditioned to only do good, which robs humans of free will. He states, “It is not logically possible – that is, it would be self-contradictory to suppose - that God could give us such free will and yet ensure that we always use it in the right way.” (Swinburne 91). He also states that a little evil is good because without evil we would not be able to feel the opposite feelings – such as happiness. If humans were just good or happy all the time, would we really know what good or happiness is, or could be? No we could