Problem of Evil
Evil has always been with humanity. From the first man that walked upon the earth up to the present day, evil has been part of life. The purpose of this paper is to show that evil is everywhere, and that, while good is also in abundant supply, evil will never totally be removed from society. The two are part of an alignment of forces; they compliment each other, and therefore they both must exist (Steel, 1994).
In this paper I will argue that evil cannot be removed from the world and I will begin by presenting the strongest argument for this position, after which I will present the strongest argument against it. Weaker arguments both for and against the issue of evil remaining in the world will be discussed after the stronger arguments in their respective sections, and in order of significance. Both of these positions will then be summarized and compared briefly in the conclusion, after possible solutions and why they will not work for the benefit of society have been presented..
The Argument For Evil Remaining in the World
Evil must remain in the world because it is the opposing force to good. Without being able to judge whether something is evil, one would not know whether something was good or not. This is significant, because good and evil create a yin and yang sort of effect that many believe is necessary to understand life and its balance (Sundberg, 2003). Without this evil, judging one's actions and beliefs would be quite difficult, and judging the actions of others would be almost impossible. There would be no precedent by which to compare them, and therefore it would be difficult to make proper laws and guidelines. There would be no agreement about what was right or wrong, because there would be no way to determine whether a specific action was appropriate or not.
Good and evil are complementary. They are the forces that help people to realize how important certain things are in their lives, and the evil in the world helps people to see the good that is also in the world. It gives contrast to things, so that human beings are able to look at happy circumstances and realize just how truly good things are for them. When they are involved with evil, they are able to remember the good and be confident that the good will come again (Steel, 1994).
Another reason that evil must stay in the world is that we have free will. With this free will, we are able to make choices about the things that we want to do and the kinds of activities that we wish to participate in. It is this choice that is the significant part of this argument. In order to make a choice, one must be able to choose between at least two different things (Steel, 1994). Being able to choose only good would not allow for any kind of choice at all. People do, however, have choices, and because they have choices, this shows that there are indeed things to choose from. Without evil in the world, there would be no discussion of making choices, because there would be no choice to make (Sundberg, 2003).
The third argument for the presence of evil is that it has always been with us, and therefore is such an ingrained part of society that it is even expected in some circumstances. Many people expect danger and they distrust others, especially if they are from different racial or ethnic backgrounds. This kind of prejudice is a type of evil, as it preys on the hearts and minds of those that allow it to control them. People often make their own evil, if they cannot find any in the outside world, and because of this it is something that will always be around, regardless of whether people want it to be there (Sundberg, 2003). They need it to some degree, because they need reasons to feel good about themselves and bad about others. This is both a cause of evil and a symptom of it, and not easily resolved.
The Argument Against Evil Remaining in the World
The opposing opinion, of course, is that evil need not remain with humanity. The arguments...
Even before one gets to Rowe's argument, however, one may disregard Hick's argument because it depends on imagining an infinite number of possibilities to explain away evil, rather than accounting for it. Instead of actually explaining how a benevolent and omnipotent god can allow evil to exist, Hick's argument simply states that this evil is not really evil, although with no evidence to back this up other than the convenient
Evil The free will defense suggests that God permits, but does not cause evil. Therefore, it is possible to live in a universe in which good and evil continually coexist. Human beings are blessed with the ability to make a choice that can further the objectives of God and good, or to promote the interests of evil. Although this view is logically coherent, there are clear objections to it. One objection is
" Defenses against it may be equally inconclusive, but in their fertility they at least promise a solution some day. Bibliography Adams, Marilyn McCord. Horrendous Evils and the Goodness of God. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999. Belliotti, Raymond a. Roman Philosophy and the Good Life. Plymouth: Lexington Books, 2009. DeRose, Keith. "Plantinga, Presumption, Possibility, and the Problem of Evil," Canadian Journal of Philosophy 21 (1991), 497-512. Draper, Paul. "Probabilistic Arguments from Evil," Religious Studies 28
Initially St. Augustine favoured the dualistic view that evil was external and separate from the world and mankind that in evident from the Manichean worldview. However, he was later to reject this strict dualism and taker another view of the nature of evil. This was more Platonic and was based on the writings of Plotinus and Porphyry. This refers to the view that evil is a measure and result of
Once again, the theist can simply point out that human knowledge -- either our own, or in the collective sense -- is not only incomplete but not even necessarily close to complete. Furthermore, inference from incomplete evidence is dangerous; before Columbus, European philosophers would have felt themselves on firm "rational ground" to suppose that no edible starchy tuber existed, and yet the potato would have proved them wrong. Attempts to
If humans are not the architects of good and evil, then, it is easy to see how a human cannot be wholly good or wholly evil. An architect may be trying to emulate the style of Frank Lloyd Wright, but his or her work will, ultimately, be different from Wright's in some ways. The emulating architect will create some aspects of his or her building that are entirely his or
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now