Problem Of Evil Research Articles

The Moral Problem with the Free Will Defense Against the Problem of Evil

The Moral Problem with the Free Will Defense Against the Problem of Evil

Death, despair and sex: The problem of evil according to Augustine as a threefold foundation of the good life

En lo general, la obra de San Agustín no está asociada con la filosofía del buen vivir tal como se la encuentra tan caracterizada en la antigüedad. Al contrario, el padre de la Iglesia se asocia más bien con un distanciamiento de la existencia terrestre y una disociación de la filosofía con la pregunta ética de la vida feliz. Así se pierde de vista el interés fundamental de Agustín por los orígenes de la pregunta por el buen vivir y la búsqueda de la felicidad.El presente artículo presenta las interpretaciones del Agustín temprano acerca del problema del mal desde tres enfoques: una aproximación metafísica, una epistemológica y una ética. Desde cada enfoque se puede indicar la forma y el impacto del mal, llevando a una triple propuesta de la vida feliz en respuesta al problema del mal. Así encontramos en Agustín un filósofo aún integrado en la filosofía antigua del buen vivir, con una propuesta basada, no en la renunciación de la vida, sino en una toma de posición ética que busca definitivamente responder al problema del mal

Pourquoi Requiem ?

Abstract Camus’s interest in stage adaptations and mainly the problem of evil as it is raised in Faulkner’s Requiem for a Nun tempted the French writer into adapting it for the stage. The reference found in this version to Dostoïevski’s Brothers Karamazov is not meant to assert a Christian faith, but on the contrary to grow away from it. Hence Camus keeps his distance with the part played by Nancy. His adaptation of the Requiem breaks away from the religious interpretations it has been submitted to, so in reality Camus moves along the same line taken by Faulkner, when he was re-writing his first version of the Requiem for a Nun, as Noël Polk has shown. So Faulkner has structured a modern tragedy. The revolt against destiny finally makes it possible to compare the Requiem to Les Justes, making it possible to read it in the light of L’Homme Révolté

Philosophy and Religious Commitment

An aspect of the question of the relationship between reason and faith concerns the compatibility between philosophy and religious commitment. I begin by considering some attempts that have been made in both the analytic and Continental traditions to divorce philosophy from the life of religious faith as far as possible: in particular, I discuss Martin Heidegger’s critique of the very idea of a ‘Christian philosophy’ and Bertrand Russell’s criticism of Aquinas for not living up to the Socratic ideal of following the argument wherever it leads. I then seek further to develop these criticisms by reviewing the current debate around the problem of evil in philosophy of religion as a case study of the dangers and drawbacks of religious commitment in philosophy. I conclude with some comments on the connection between ideology and philosophy, and claim that much of what passes as Christian philosophy is ideological as opposed to rational or truth-seeking in character.

‘In human shape to become the very beast!’ – Henry More on animals

ABSTRACTAnimals – both tame and wild, as metaphors and as real presences – populate many of More’s works. In this essay, I show that, from the early Psychodia Platonica to the Divine Dialogues, animals are at the core of key metaphysical issues that reverberate on the levels of psychology and ethics. In particular I discuss three main aspects: (1) the role of animals in More’s critique of atheism, both as safeguard for the body–soul interaction and as proofs of divine providence in nature; (2) the problem of evil in the universe, and how to justify the existence of ‘evil’ animals in particular; (3) the differentiation between animals and humans, especially on the basis of their respective possibility of attaining happiness. In all three cases, I argue that More attempts to ‘tame’ the nature of animals, and yet that he is aware that ‘animality’ remains partly untamed.

The problem of evil and the suffering of creeping things

Even philosophers of religion working on the problem of non-human animal suffering have ignored the suffering of creatures like insects. Sensible as this seems, it’s mistaken. I am not sure whether creatures like these can suffer, but it is plausible, on both commonsensical and scientific and philosophical grounds, that many of them can. If they do, their suffering makes the problem of evil much worse: their vast numbers mean the amount of evil in the world will almost certainly be increased by many, many orders of magnitude, the fact that disproportionately many of them live lives which are nasty, brutish, and short means that the proportion of good to evil in the world will be drastically worsened, and their relative lack of cognitive sophistication means that many theodicies, including many specifically designed to address animal suffering, would apply to their suffering only with much greater difficulty, if at all. Philosophers of religion should therefore more seriously investigate whether these beings can suffer and what, if anything, could justify God in allowing as much.

Kyokutei Bakin’s Punishment for Evil and Yomihon’s World Chinsetsu Yumiharizuki and Nansō Satomi Hakkenden’s Problem of Evil

Kyokutei Bakin’s Punishment for Evil and Yomihon’s World Chinsetsu Yumiharizuki and Nansō Satomi Hakkenden’s Problem of Evil

On the doing-allowing distinction and the problem of evil: a reply to Daniel Lim

In his article ‘Doing, allowing, and the problem of evil’ recently published in this journal, Daniel Lim attempts to undermine the following claims with respect to God: (1) the doing-allowing distinction exists and (2) the doing-allowing distinction is morally significant. I argue that Lim’s attempt is unsuccessful, and that his understanding of divine providence has the unacceptable consequence of implying that God is the originator of evil.

Berkeleyan Idealism, Christianity, and the Problem of Evil

Berkeleyan Idealism, Christianity, and the Problem of Evil

Probabilistic theism and the problem of evil

I would like to present in the article an “omnipotence model of a theodicy of chance”, which is, as I believe, compatible with the view called probabilistic theism. I also would like to argue that this model satisfies the criteria of being a good theodicy. By a good theodicy I mean a reasonable and plausible theistic account of evil. A good theodicy should be: a) comprehensive, b) adequate, c) authentic and d) existentially relevant.

Leibniz et Bayle: Confrontation et dialogue ed. by Christian Leduc, Paul Rateau, and Jean-Luc Solère

Reviewed by: Leibniz et Bayle: Confrontation et dialogue ed. by Christian Leduc, Paul Rateau, and Jean-Luc Solère Mara van der Lugt Christian Leduc, Paul Rateau, and Jean-Luc Solère, editors. Leibniz et Bayle: Confrontation et dialogue. Studia Leibnitiana 43. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 2015. Pp. 452 €64.00. Central to this volume are two philosophical powerhouses of the early modern period: Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Pierre Bayle. Born in, respectively, 1646 and 1647, both made for an astonishing career in a variety of scholarly disciplines and reached, if not equal, then certainly comparable fame in the course of their lives. Nowadays, Bayle's reputation is eclipsed by that of Leibniz, who is the focus of yearly conferences and libraries of scholarship, while Bayle had to await the later twentieth century to be rediscovered. He has since been at the center of a quickly expanding body of scholarship, which continues to be sharply divided over the vexed question how to interpret his religious stance. This imbalance in the amount of scholarship devoted to the two thinkers partly has to do with their respective modes of philosophizing. Though it is an exaggeration to say that Leibniz was systematic where Bayle was critical, it is the case that Leibniz was more intent on building his own systems, Bayle on exposing the inherent weaknesses of others'. Leibniz left a corpus of philosophical treatises, monographs and essays, while Bayle left his arguments scattered in a variety of textual curiosity cabinets, combining philosophical argument with generous helpings of historical and literary digressions. But if this diverse treatment of Leibniz and Bayle seems warranted by the character of their philosophical oeuvres, it becomes questionable when one takes into account their intellectual itineraries, which crossed in various debates. As intellectual sparring partners, they engaged with each other's arguments with the highest degree of dedication, to such an extent that Leibniz's philosophical legacy would be unthinkable without Bayle. One of the major strengths of this collection of articles is to bring out Leibniz and Bayle in "confrontation and dialogue" and emphasize the dialectical and interactive component of their philosophical sparring sessions, which spanned decades and a wide variety of texts. The twenty-one articles collected in this bilingual volume (French-English) are grouped thematically into four categories. The articles in the first section, "Methods, Hypotheses and Truth," discuss both philosophers' views on epistemology, skepticism, truth and belief, and trace the evolution of their debate in these areas; a valuable contribution by Michael Hickson questions the common dichotomy that associates Leibniz with rationalism, Bayle with skepticism. The second section, "Pre-established Harmony and Plastic Natures," is oriented more towards the various stages within the development of Leibniz's system, and the role played by Bayle's criticism throughout this process. A crucial part in this is the debate on animal sensation and Bayle's attempt to disprove the logic of Leibniz's pre-established harmony via the thought-experiment of a dog that suddenly passes from a state of pleasure to a state of pain; and Bayle and Leibniz's differing views on Ralph Cudworth and plastic natures, which Bayle connects to the philosophical specter of Stratonism. [End Page 353] The third section, "Faith and Reason," focuses on Bayle and Leibniz's views on religion, theology, rationalism and fideism, sometimes questioning the assumption that Leibniz and Bayle were diametrically opposed with regard to reason and religious belief (Kristen Irwin). Other articles examine their respective views on quietism (Thomas Lennon) and the apocalypse (Hartmut Rudolph): this last article contains some unfortunate inaccuracies (e.g. the misattribution of Bayle's Critique Générale to Louis Maimbourg, 337). An especially insightful contribution by Paul Rateau discusses the figure of the virtuous atheist in Leibniz and Bayle. The fourth section, "Evil and Theodicy," is centered on one of the most influential interactions between Bayle and Leibniz, which would leave a huge impact on the eighteenth century: their debate on the problem of evil, various aspects of which are discussed by the articles in this section. Especially noteworthy is Gianni Paganini's contribution, which raises an important question with regard to the eclipse of the Book of Job from the...

A Geachian Cure for Morally Paralyzed Skeptical Theists

Skeptical theism is a popular response to the evidential problem of evil, but it has recently been accused of proving too much. If skeptical theism is true, its detractors claim, then we not only have no good reason for thinking that God’s reasons for action should be available to creatures like us, but we also have no good reason for thinking that the reasons which govern how we ought to act should be available to creatures like us. And given this ignorance, we would be morally paralyzed, unable to decide what we ought to do in ordinary situations that call for a moral decision. In this paper, I present a simple solution to this problem of moral paralysis by drawing on Peter Geach’s now famous argument for the attributivity of “good.”

Leibniz’s Contemporary Modal Theodicy

In this essay, it is argued that Leibniz's theodicy is even stronger than it might first appear, but only if we also take into account his superessentialism, the view that every property of a substance is essential to it, and theory of compossibility, the notion that possible worlds are intrinsically possible just in case they are compossible—that is, they are internally consistent. After describing how we should understand these principles in Leibniz's thought, I argue that although there are obvious cases of evil in the best of all possible worlds, if such cases of evil did not occur, then the overall goodness of the actual world be diminished. Due to the unique nature of his solution to the problem of evil, Leibniz remains an important interlocutor even today in metaphysics, theology, and philosophy of religion.

Is the problem of evil a deontological problem?

Is the problem of evil a deontological problem?

Reflections on the Deep Connection Between Problems of Evil and Problems of Divine Hiddenness

In the literature on the subject, it is common to understand the problem of divine hiddenness and the problem of evil as distinct problems. Schellenberg (1993, 2010) and van Inwagen (2002) are representative. Such a sharp distinction is not so obvious to me. In this essay, I explore the relationship between the problem(s) of evil and the problem(s) of divine hiddenness.

The Problem of Evil and Liberal Theologies

The Problem of Evil (POE), the idea that inexplicable human and non-human suffering is inconsistent with the existence of a benevolent, omniscient and omnipotent God, stands as one of the greatest challenges to classical theism. Many philosophers and theologians have offered theodicies, defense of God, in an attempt to blunt the force this problem. Others, however, believing that those theodicies have been effective have abandoned the classical definition of God and have embraced more liberal theologies, including deism, pantheism, process theology, and alterity theism. Theists of this sort argue that their theologies are immune from the POE. This is so because the POE derives its force from the supposed attributes of God. If God is not omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, the problem disappears. So rather than seek to resolve the POE, theists who hold one or the other of these non-classical positions seek to walk around it altogether. The problem simply dissolves, it is claimed, when these alternative theologies are embraced. This article critiques the most prominent liberal responses to the POE and demonstrates how they fail.

Ibn ʿArabī (1165–1240) and Rūmī (1207–1273) on the Question of Evil: Discontinuities in Sufi Metaphysics

ABSTRACTThis article compares and contrasts Ibn ʿArabī’s and Rūmī’s accounts of evil. Ibn ʿArabī explains the existence of evil as a consequence of both metaphysical necessity and God’s volitional act. Evil is the inevitable ‘shadow’ of existence implied by the Infinity of God, and God’s mercy existentiates the possibilities ‘hidden’ in the Infinite, allowing this metaphysical necessity to emerge. In contrast to Ibn ʿArabī’s necessitarian-cum-volitional theodicy, Rūmī presents an almost exclusively volitional theodicy. He traces the roots of evil to the Divine Will. To preserve God’s moral perfection, he frequently points to the positive compensating functions of the existence of evil in the world. Ibn ʿArabī’s theodicy enables him to accentuate the necessity of evil in order to save the act of will, and hence God’s perfection, from being directly related to the emergence of evil. Rūmī’s volitional theodicy, however, relates the Divine Will directly to evil, and subsequently attempts to preserve the purity of the Divine intention by accentuating all the positive compensations.

Philosophy of Religion: An Introduction - William L. Rowe

In the preface of the 4th edition (p. xiii), Rowe relates the development of philosophy of religion in the 21st century with the ability of religious thinkers to demonstrate that religious belief supports rational arguments, growth in the understanding of non-Western religious traditions and continued interest in the problem of evil. He indicates his intention to address the reasons behind the development of this field of study. Rowe divides the topics of discussion into eleven chapters. In the introduction, the author indicates that philosophy of religion examines basic religious beliefs as well as the major conceptions of God that emerged in Western civilization, namely theistic ideas of God (p. 1-3).

Analytic Philosophical Theology and the recovery of metaphysics An interview with Brian Leftow

In this interview Prof. Brian Leftow answers questions concerning the causes of the emergence of Analytic Philosophical Theology within the analytic tradition; the advantages of maintaining the traditional picture of perfect being theology with regards to divine attributes; his conception of the origin of necessary truths; the problem of evil; and the importance of university investment in research on philosophical theology.

Book Review: Pathways in Theodicy: An Introduction to the Problem of Evil

Book Review: Pathways in Theodicy: An Introduction to the Problem of Evil