The problem of evil B/C summary notes

This page contains B/C grade level summary revision notes for the Problem of Evil topic.

Find the full revision page here.

This topic unfortunately cannot be split into neat paragraphs.

There are jigsaw puzzle pieces that you have to learn and figure out which to put into each essay, including whether to do the full AO1 if they are the focus or minor AO1 if not.

The logical problem of evil as a version of the problem of evil (Mackie)

Mackie argues that an all-powerful God would be able to stop evil and an all-loving God would be motivated to stop evil.
Logically, something can’t exist if there’s a being with the power and motivation to eliminate it.
So, if evil exists, then God cannot exist.
Evil, omnipotence & omnibenevolence form an inconsistent triad – meaning they cannot all exist.

The evidential problem of evil as a version of the problem of evil (Hume or Rowe)

Hume puts forward an evidential problem of evil.
Hume thinks it is actually logically possible for God and evil to exist.
However, evil is evidence against God’s existence.
The evidence of evil that we see in the world means belief in God is not justified.
There could be a God technically, but the evidence is against it.

Augustine’s theodicy (response to the problem of evil)

Augustine says that God allows evil because we deserve it.
He says “evil is either sin or punishment for sin”.
The ‘fall’ of humanity due to Adam & Eve disobeying God caused original sin – a corruption in human nature giving us an irresistible temptation to sin. This explains moral evil – the evil humans do to each other.
As punishment, God banished us from the garden of eden into this fallen world, which explains natural evil – evil resulting from the workings of the natural world e.g. disease and natural disasters.

Augustine vs the logical problem

Original sin violates moral responsibility & incompatibility with omnibenevolence.
Criticism of Augustine: how can it be fair for us to be punished for the actions of Adam and Eve?
Their disobedience was not our fault, so it cannot be loving for God to punish us for that.

Evaluation of Augustine vs the logical problem

Augustine responds: we aren’t punished for their actions, we are punished because we are sinful beings – because we are born with original sin!

Augustine vs the evidential problem

Criticism of Augustine: there is lots of scientific evidence against the fall – evolution suggests we evolved.
The idea that sin is inherited is unscientific nonsense.

Evaluation of Augustine vs the evidential problem

Maybe the fall story didn’t happen – but there is still good evidence for original sin – look at how terrible humans are e.g. Nazis.

Irenaeus & Hick’s theodicy (response to the problem of evil)

God allows evil because it serves the good purpose of soul-making – character development.
To become good people and deserve heaven, we must choose good over evil.
In that case, we need evil in order to become good.
E.g. if you see someone suffering from disease, you might become a better person through being more compassionate.
So, evil is required for us to be able to develop into good people who deserve to go to heaven.

Irenaeus & Hick vs the logical problem

Criticism of Irenaeus/Hick: Why didn’t God just create us good to begin with..?
This whole process of soul-making is unnecessary and evil.

Evaluation of Irenaeus & Hick vs the logical problem

However – Irenaeus/Hick argue God can’t make us good.
A good person is one who has freely chosen good over evil. If God makes us good – then we aren’t really choosing good ourselves, and then we wouldn’t really be good.
So, Soul-making is necessary.

Irenaeus & Hick vs the evidential problem

Criticism of Irenaeus/Hick: there is lots of evil that does not help soul-making.
E.g. a child who dies of cancer – they were too young to understand what was happening, there’s no way that evil helped them become a better person – in fact it prevented that.
Some evil is soul-breaking, causing people to become depressed etc – it’s not soul-making.

Evaluation of Irenaeus & Hick vs the evidential problem

Maybe other people could have learned lessons from the child dying.
E.g. their parents.