Mackie argues, in essence, that none of the traditional theistic arguments is successful taken either one at a time or in tandem, that the theist does not have a satisfactory response to the problem of evil, and that on balance the theistic hypothesis is much less probable than is its denial. I argue that he is mistaken in nearly all of his major contentions. The philosophical problem of evil is the challenge of reconciling belief in god with evil in. Mackie s objection to the free will defense will g in this essay i am going to discuss one of the more important objections to the free will theodicy, that one that alleges god could create perfect people, and suggest a little known, unorthodox but probably acceptable defense to the problem. In section a, mackie outlines the adequate solutions offered by some religious thinkers. Even if there had to be some nonred to have red, there would only need to be a tiny speck. Free will is a great good, and it is impossible for god to give us free will without allowing evil. If evil exists and god exists, then either god doesnt have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesnt know when evil exists, or doesnt have the desire to eliminate all evil. The problem of evil is often formulated in two forms. Craigs response to the problem of evil classical theism. Damn that evil the problem of evil is an issue that is entirely too overlooked and dismissed by most christians. The problem of evil poses a philosophical threat to the design argument because it implies that.
We should, therefore, state the problem of evil in terms of second order evil, and against this form of the problem the present solution is useless. The universe is better off with some evil in it than it could be without. A critique of the free will defense, a comprehensive look. Mackies logical version of the problem of evil mackie contends that the following four beliefs constitute a logically inconsistent set. Firstly there is evil that does not originate from the choices and actions of moral agents, such as natural evils disasters, diseases, accidents, etc. Plantinga and the problem of evil iowa state university. The problem of evil, in th e sense in w hich i shall be using th e phrase, is a problem only for someone w ho believes th at there is a g od w ho is both om nipotent an d w holly good. The problem of evil stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Section two establishes the moral objectionability of many responses to the. Mackie asks, if god has made men such that in their. Mackie uses the problem of evil to show that belief in an all good god is irrational. If god were allknowing, it seems that god would know about all of the horrible things that happen in our world. Problem of evil responses introduction to philosophy.
But the theologian can, if he wishes, accept this criticism. L mackies evil and omnipotence intro 1 what is the problem of evil only exists as a problem for someone who mackie worksheet. Mackie wrote a very convincing piece on the problem of evil called evil and omnipotence, in which he attempts to show that one of the following premises must be false in order for them to be consistent with each other. The nature of the problem j l mackie evil and omnipotence mackie focussed on the logical problem of evil. Mackie 3 but insofar as one tries to solve the problem of evil by stressing the importance or value of second order good in counterbalancing the existence of first order evil, one falls prey to what mackie calls a fatal objectionthe existence of second order evil like indifference. That this argument is valid is perhaps most easily seen by a reductio argument. Evil is not a substance augustines defintion of evil, when the good action is not taken or when something does not live up to its expectation herbert mccabe contribution used the example of bad grapes, we know its bad taste, but it doesnt mean the actual essence of it is bad.
Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. Craigs response to the problem of evil by john derosa published january 9, 2018 updated may 19, 2018 take a look at this great synopsis of dr. No reason to think that it is metaphysically impossible for everything to be, say, red 2. Alvin plantingas freewill defense is a logical argument developed by the american analytic philosopher alvin plantinga and published in its final version in his 1977 book god, freedom, and evil. Mackie and lewis the problem of evil mackie the socalled problem of evil is a puzzle arising from many theists conception of the divine.
Mackie argues that if an omnipotent and morally perfect god exists, why then is there so much evil in this world. Though it seems improbable and odd, it is logically conceivable, so it is, therefore, logically possible. The logical form of the argument tries to show a logical impossibility in the coexistence of god and evil, 1 4 while the evidential form tries to show that given the evil in the world, it is improbable that there is an. One version of this problem includes animal suffering from natural evil, such as the violence and fear faced by animals from predators, natural disasters, over the history of evolution. Apr 22, 2016 a problem i see is that even in mackie s world, where every agent makes the morally best choice and takes the morally best action, the problem of evil still arises. Alvin plantinga s freewill defense is a logical argument developed by the american analytic philosopher alvin plantinga and published in its final version in his 1977 book god, freedom, and evil. This response presupposes that humans are indeed free, and it fails to reckon with. In their approaches to the problems of evil, mackie, rowe, and plantinga assume the same equivalency. Jun, 20 an account of the problem of evil and a consideration of the various objections to the problem.
Many people immediately respond to the problem of evil, as stated above, by saying that the problem with the argument is that it ignores free well. An account of the problem of evil and a consideration of the various objections to the problem. Augustine quote that sets out the problem of evil theism cannot be made coherent without a serious change to at least one of its central doctrines j. A nd it is a logical problem, th e problem of clarifying an d reconciling a num ber of beliefs. The existence of evil and suffering in our world seems to pose a serious challenge to belief in the existence of a perfect god. One argument, known as the free will defense, claims that evil is caused not by god but by human beings, who must be allowed to choose evil if they are to have free will.
We will explore this view in this essay, but first, let us briefly look at the basic foundation for mackies arguments. Along the way, she distinguishes different ways in which people believe that god exists. Axiology, realism, and the problem of evil request pdf. But the theist is not prepared to affirm any of those things. The evidential problem admits that god and the existence of evil are not logically incompatible, yet considers if the amount or kinds of evil in the world count as probable evidence against the existence of god.
He can admit that no rational proof of gods existence is possible. Rowe discusses mackie implicitly and plantinga explicitly in. Mackies definition of the problem the problem of evil is god is omnipotent, god is wholly good, and yet evil exists. William lane craigs work on the problem of evil in these two, short, wonderfullyproduced videos. A critique of the free will defense, a comprehensive look at. Mackie agrees that the problem for the theist can be solved by giving up one of the three propositions. God and the problem of evil william rowe blackwells companion to natural theology jp moreland and william lane craig. His discussion of each is intended to make clear the reasons for which they fail to address the real problem. Plantinga s argument is a defense against the logical problem of evil as formulated by the philosopher j. This essay offers a brief history of process theology and a sense of its current concerns by discussing the varying responses to the problem of evil within that history. In a widely discussed piece entitled evil and omnipotence john mackie repeats this claim. That means that believing in e and believing in god is like believing in a fivesided square. Traditional solutions to the problem of evil and why mackie says they fail. From within the wellspring of process theism, it is possible to argue cogently.
The logical problem of evil centers on the apparent inconsistency of the following two propositions. In the omnipotnce of this essay, we will examine some theistic responses to the logical problem of evil that do not require the abandonment of any central tenet of theism. If an omnipotent, omnibenevolent god exists, then evil does not exist. The logical problem arises because theists maintain that there are no limits to what an omnipotent being can do. Mackie 1955 and theistic responses to these arguments e. Succinctly, plantinga denies that 1 and 2 are inconsistent, and aims to show so by arguing that mackies principle that. Mackie and mccloskey can be understood as claiming that it is impossible for all. A perfectly good being would prevent any evil it could prevent 4. The problem of evil is usually seen as the problem of how the existence of god can be reconciled with the existence of evil in the world. Mackie mackies logical version of the problem of evil mackie. For if god can create a being with morally significant freedom, it must be possible for god to create such a being who chooses to freely bring about evil. Arguing about evil mackie s argument animal suffering and the problem of evil essay surveyor link limited theodicies adduced for the problem.
C2 god is either not omniscient, not omnipotent, not omnibenevolent, or nonexistent. Hick argues that moral evil is a result of the mystery of free will. The early contemporary literature on the problem of evil focused first on logical arguments from evil e. Classical theists have held that god is omniscient, omnipotent, and omnibenevolent. Mackie, in his essay evil and omnipotence, tries to prove that believing in a mighty and all good god is irrational. Mackies objection to the free will defense blogger. Mackies evil and omnipotence evkl, however, it is not possible that god has a morally sufficient reason for allowing evil, then it seems that would be true. Mackie considers three main objections to this argument, all of which. Mackie considers three main objections to this argument, all of which are best understood as objections to one of 3 or 6. Generally, a defense against the problem of evil may refer to attempts to defuse the logical problem of evil by showing that there is no logical incompatibility between the existence of evil and the existence of god. The basic idea here is that at least many kinds of evil are not the result of gods actions, but of the free actions of human beings. The problem of evil has also been extended beyond human suffering, to include suffering of animals from cruelty, disease and evil. His primary point of focus is the existence of evil, which, he claims, goes against the existence of an all good god. The traditional arguments for the existence of god have been fairly thoroughly criticised by philosophers.
In fact, it has been the cause of countless articles, lectures, and debates for centuries. Brian huffling introduction perhaps the strongest argument against theism is the problem of evil. He then concludes that theism is unsatisfactory and rationally unacceptable. There are, then, quite a num ber of adequate solutions of th e problem of evil, an d som e of these have been adopted, or almost adopted, by various thinkers. The logical argument has since fallen out of favor, and philosophers have focused their attention on the evidential problem of evil. Thus the problem of evil is reduced to the theodicity that this is the best of all possible worlds a quiteliterally ridiculous statement, but not a selfcontradicting one. Section 1 states mackies argument and sketches a response to it in the spirit of what is badly. Logical problem of evil internet encyclopedia of philosophy. As mackie notes, the inconsistency of these propositions depends on what he called quasilogical.
I explain the implications of several nonrealist theories of value for the problem of evil and argue that, if nonrealism is true, then we need to rethink and reframe the entire discussion about. Wikipedia is generally shitty for philosophy, so take the specifics with a grain of salt, but this article is. There exists an omninatured creator of the universe 2. Mackie, and to which the freewill defense responds, is an argument.
Mackies evil and omnipotence essay 1652 words bartleby. Although he admits that these solutions work up to a point, mackie describes them as halfhearted because, he argues, they dont take the idea of evil seriously enough. Mackie quote describing the implication of the problem of evil. The universe is better with some evil in it than it could be if there were no evil. The epistemic question posed by evil is whether the world contains undesirable states of affairs that provide the basis for an argument that makes it unreasonable to believe in the existence of god.
Alvin plantingas version of the defense is a famous attempt on the problem of evil. Therefore, the objective of this paper is to address the problem of evil from a christian worldview. Mackies formulation of the problem is a logical one rather than one that. Sep 12, 2009 thus the problem of evil is reduced to the theodicity that this is the best of all possible worlds a quiteliterally ridiculous statement, but not a selfcontradicting one. According to those theists, god has the following three properties. A variety of arguments have been offered in response to the problem of evil, and some of them have been used in both theodicies and defenses. And yet evil 2 plainly exists, and indeed most theists in other contexts stress its existence more than that of evil 1. Plantingas argument is a defense against the logical problem of evil as formulated by the philosopher j. According to incompatibility or logical versions of the problem of evil, e is logically incompatible with gods existence mackie 1955. The problem with holding both of these beliefs, mackie argues, is that they lead to a contradiction, making them logically inconsistent. The problem of evil as a moral objection to theism university of. And in his famous response to the logical problem of evil, plantinga makes it clear that his concern is with the consistency between god as a tcg and evil. Mackie s world is a possible world where all free agents choose to do the morally good action with every choice.
Mackie spends most of the article considering various responses to this question. And if it is possible for god to create creatures that make morally significant free choices, then it is possible for god and evil to coexist. Responses to the problem of evil have occasionally been classified as defences or theodicies. Only exists as a problem for someone who believes that there is a god who is both omnipotent and wholly good.
The crux of the theistic response is to show that indeed god is indeed justified in permitting evil. I plantingas presentation of the free will defense is a landmark in contemporary discussions of the problem of evil. Existence of evil is a logically necessary precondition for the existence of good mackie s response. In other words, no one does anything evil, so evil does not exist. Analyse the implications of mackies views on the problem. He believes the occurrence of nonmoral evil in the world is a necessary condition for the ethics of choice and the process of soulmaking. Little is needed if the majority of group members are operating with the beliefs without questioning of them. There seems to be some contradiction between these three propositions, so that if any two of them were true the third would be false. Probably the most famous back and forth on this is mackie s formulation of the problem of evil and plantingas reply. Mackie s evil and omnipotence essay 1652 words 7 pages j.