Philosophers of religion have identified two sources of evil: natural and moral. 'Natural evil' consists of natural disasters, disease and all the pain and suffering not caused by humans. 'Moral evil' refers to those acts of cruelty, viciousness and injustice carried out by humans upon fellow humans and other creatures. St Augustine defines evil as that 'which we fear, or the act of fearing itself'.
John Hick: 'Can the presence of evil in the world be reconciled with the existence of a God who is unlimited both in goodness and in power?'
Philosophers have identified at least two different formulations of the problem of evil: the logical problem and the evidential problem.
The logical problem of evil is the statement that believers are committed to holding two apparently inconsistent beliefs:
- God is the all powerful, wholly good and all knowing creator of the universe
- Evil exits in the universe
J.L Mackie adds a third proposition that brings out the contradiction:
3. A wholly good being eliminates evil as far as it can
The evidential problem of evil:
There are many thinkers including Charles Darwin, David Hume and William Rowe who believe that the amount of evil that exists in the world weighs against an argument that there is an almighty God who is wholly good. Why doesn't God intervene when natural disasters take place that kill many people? Why does God allow illnesses to take place and cause humans to suffer? Why does God allow there to be serial killers?
The evidential problem poses a question: Given the existence of evil, which of the following is the most reasonable hypothesis:
- That there is an infinitely powerful, wholly good God who created the world; or
- That there is no such God
For Hume and Rowe the second hypothesis supports the existence of evil.
No comments:
Post a Comment