Suffering and Evil: The Logical Problem

Key Insights

The Problem of Evil and Suffering

• Epicurus' Argument: The logical problem of suffering and evil questions the existence of an all-loving, all-powerful God amidst the reality of suffering.

• Key Question: "If God is willing to prevent evil but not able, then he's not all-powerful. If he is able but not willing, he is not good."

Hidden Assumptions Examined

• First Assumption: Can God create any world He wants? The argument assumes that God can create a world without suffering, ignoring the necessity of free will.

  • Insight: Free will means God cannot force individuals to always choose good, making the existence of suffering compatible with a loving God.

• Second Assumption: Would God prefer a world without suffering? This assumption is not necessarily true, as suffering can lead to greater goods.

  • Insight: If God allows suffering for a greater purpose, the assumption fails.

Burden of Proof

• Critical Point: For the logical problem of evil to hold, atheists must prove that:

  • Free will cannot coexist with suffering.

  • There are no good reasons for God to permit suffering.

• Conclusion: This burden is "too heavy to bear," suggesting both God and suffering can exist simultaneously.

Philosophical Consensus

• Current View: Many philosophers, including atheists, have moved away from the logical problem of evil, recognizing it as bankrupt.

• Quote: "It's now acknowledged on almost all sides that the logical argument is bankrupt."

Next Steps in Discussion

• Probability Version: The video hints at further exploration into the probability version of the problem of evil, indicating that while the logical argument may not hold, the discussion on suffering and theism continues.

Study Guide: The Problem of Evil and the Existence of God

Key Concepts

The Logical Problem of Evil

• Epicurus' Argument:

  • If God is willing to prevent evil but not able, He is not all-powerful.

  • If He is able but not willing, He is not good.

  • If He is both willing and able, then evil should not exist.

  • If He is neither, then why call Him God?

Hidden Assumptions

1. Assumption 1: God can create any world He wants.

   • Counterpoint: If God desires a world with free will, He cannot force free choices. Free will inherently allows for the possibility of evil.

2. Assumption 2: God would prefer a world without suffering.

   • Counterpoint: Suffering may be permitted for a greater good. We cannot definitively know God's preferences.

Conclusion on the Logical Problem

• The argument fails because:

  • The first assumption (God can create any world) is not necessarily true.

  • The second assumption (God prefers a world without suffering) is also not necessarily true.

• Philosophers, including atheists, have largely abandoned the logical problem of evil as a valid argument against theism.

Important Terms

• Theism: Belief in an all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good God.

• Free Will: The ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded.

• Greater Good: A principle suggesting that suffering may be justified if it leads to a more significant positive outcome.

Philosophical Perspectives

• Burden of Proof: The responsibility to provide evidence for a claim. In this case, atheists must prove that free will and God's reasons for allowing suffering are logically impossible.

• Bankruptcy of the Logical Argument: The consensus among many philosophers that the logical problem of evil does not successfully demonstrate a contradiction in theism.

Next Steps in Discussion

• Explore the Probability Version of the Problem of Evil: This version examines the likelihood of God's existence in light of the presence of evil, rather than focusing solely on logical inconsistencies.

Summary

• The logical problem of evil presents challenges to theism but is not conclusively proven.

• The existence of suffering does not inherently negate the existence of an all-powerful, all-loving God.

• Philosophical discourse continues to evolve, with a shift towards examining the probability of God's existence in relation to evil rather than strict logical contradictions.

Study Tips

• Familiarize yourself with the definitions and key arguments.

• Reflect on real-world examples of suffering and consider how they might relate to the concepts of free will and greater good.

• Engage in discussions to deepen understanding and explore different philosophical perspectives.

The Problem of Evil: A Philosophical Exploration

The existence of suffering and evil in the world poses a profound challenge to the belief in an all-loving, all-powerful God. This dilemma, famously articulated by the ancient philosopher Epicurus, raises critical questions: If God is willing to prevent evil but not able, then He is not all-powerful. If He is able but not willing, then He is not good. If He is both willing and able, how can evil exist? And if He is neither, why call Him God? This logical problem of evil has led many to conclude that the existence of suffering negates the existence of God. But is this argument as compelling as it seems?

Understanding the Argument

At first glance, the argument appears to present a logical inconsistency between the existence of God and the presence of suffering. However, upon closer examination, we find that the argument relies on two hidden assumptions that may not hold true.

1. Assumption of God's Power: The first assumption is that God can create any world He desires. But what if God wants to create a world populated by beings with free will? The concept of free will inherently includes the possibility of choosing evil over good. Forcing someone to make a morally good choice contradicts the very nature of free will. Thus, the idea that God can create a world where everyone always chooses good is logically impossible. This suggests that the first assumption—that God can create any world—may not be necessarily true.

2. Assumption of God's Preference: The second assumption posits that an all-loving God would prefer a world without suffering. However, this assumption overlooks the complexity of moral development and the potential for greater goods that can arise from suffering. For instance, we often permit suffering in our own lives to achieve a greater good, such as personal growth or the development of empathy. If it is even conceivable that God allows suffering for a greater purpose, then we cannot definitively claim that He would prefer a world devoid of suffering.

The Burden of Proof

For the logical problem of evil to hold, the burden of proof lies with the atheist to demonstrate that it is logically impossible for free will to exist alongside suffering, and that God cannot have justifiable reasons for permitting suffering. This is a heavy burden, one that many philosophers, including some atheists, have found difficult to bear. The consensus among many in the philosophical community is that the logical argument against theism is fundamentally flawed.

The Shift in Perspective

While the logical problem of evil has been largely discredited, the discussion does not end there. Philosophers have shifted their focus to the probability version of the problem of evil, which examines the likelihood of God's existence in light of the suffering we observe in the world. This approach acknowledges that while the existence of suffering does not logically negate the existence of God, it does raise questions about the nature of God and His relationship to the world.

Real-World Implications

The implications of this philosophical debate extend beyond mere academic discourse. Many individuals grapple with the reality of suffering in their own lives, leading to crises of faith or existential questioning. For instance, consider the story of a parent who loses a child to illness. In the face of such profound suffering, the question of God's existence and goodness becomes intensely personal. This is where the philosophical arguments intersect with human experience, prompting individuals to seek answers that resonate with their lived realities.

Conclusion

The problem of evil remains one of the most significant challenges to theistic belief. However, as we have explored, the logical argument against the existence of God based on suffering is not as airtight as it may initially appear. The assumptions underlying the argument can be questioned, and the burden of proof is substantial.

As we continue to engage with these profound questions, it is essential to recognize the complexity of the human experience. Suffering is an undeniable part of life, but it does not necessarily negate the possibility of a loving and powerful God. Instead, it invites us to explore deeper questions about the nature of existence, free will, and the potential for greater goods that can emerge from our struggles.

In the end, the dialogue surrounding the problem of evil is not just an intellectual exercise; it is a journey that many undertake in search of meaning, understanding, and ultimately, hope. Whether one arrives at belief or skepticism, the exploration itself can lead to profound insights about the human condition and our place in the universe.