An Analysis of Peter van Inwagen's The Magnitude, Duration, and Distribution of Evil: a Theodicy

goodness of man to the well-being of the world and that afailure of one leads

John Hick argues in this writing that the all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good Christian god is compatible with an abundance of suffering. He offers solutions to the problem of suffering which relies heavily upon a tripartite foundation. Hick divides evil into two: Moral Evil = the evil that human being cause - either to themselves or to each other. And Non-Moral Evil = the evil that is not caused by human activity - natural disasters, etc. He tries to explain that a world without pain and suffering, moral traits such as courage, patience and sympathy would not be developed.

Florence, reading your thread was most enjoyable, because you displayed in your writing on the topic of “The Problem with Evil,” a compassion for God’s people. With that being said, the problem of evil has and always will be a debatable subject between a believer of Christ and a non-believer because of the depth of its interpretation. Erickson submits, “…the problem of evil arises to varying degrees for different theologies; in addition, it takes differing forms.”1 He also adds, “John Feinberg has observed that the problem of evil must be considered within the context of a given theology and what such concepts as evil, good, and freedom mean within that system.”2 However, when there is a catastrophic disaster that has taken place in the world

There is a lot of evil in the world, and much of it happens unexplainably. In the history of life on Earth bad things have happened and evil has caused problems. In relation to some world

It was once suggested that evil was simply the absence of good, and while this statement is not entirely false, it is a vast understatement to the reality that is an all-powerful, omnipotent, God, or good, and ever scheming, ever tormenting enemy of all things good, or evil. This false dichotomy is equivocal to the argument that black is simply the absence of white. It is correct to state that there is no white in black, but the reality is much more complicated than that. Black is an amalgamation of all colors on the color wheel, not just the subtraction of white. Likewise, evil includes the absence of good, but also includes many other elements such as, “people [just being] people; petty, self-absorbed, stupid, unadmirable, but not wicked” (Ryken, 307) in the words of Susan Wise Bauer. Or, as she later states, “this is how the evildoers of Scripture are portrayed, as ordinary men and women who, for whatever psychological reasons, open the door to transcendent evil—and willingly leave it cracked.” (Ryken, 310) There is good, there is evil, and there is a great deal of ambiguity in the middle. These ideas provide evidence that evil is much more then simple the absence of good. This knowledge, as well as addressing the modern world’s perception of good and evil will be further scrutinized through the course of this essay.

Evans also looks to distinguish the difference between a defense and a theodicy. Evans’ purpose introducing these theodicies is to merely show that each has its own place within the discussion of the problem of evil, but none of them sufficiently answers the problem of evil.

Simon Blackburn claims that the presence of evil in the world strongly suggests that an all-good, all-powerful, all-knowing God does not exist. I oppose this claim because I believe that God gave us the choice of free will and he continues to value it. Without free will we would lack autonomy and be considered God’s puppets or programmed Robots. In “God” Simon Blackburn offers two observations. The first observation is that if there were an all-good, all-powerful, all-knowing God there wouldn’t be any natural disasters.

The fourth idea argues evil is the result of human free will. God purposely created human to have free will, the power to choose. If human have to exist in the world then there will be evil as a result of the humans’ choices. However, this does not account for the occurrences of natural evil. Human did not choose or cause hurricane, earthquake, diseases, or any other natural disasters. The Free Will Defense does not validate why God would allow natural evil to burden and destroy

The ‘Problem of Evil’ as characterized by J. L. Mackie can be summarised in three points:

Published in the November 2011 article of the Jewish based magazine Tikkun, “The Nature of Evil” written by prominent author and theorist Terry Eagleton argues that individuals glamorize evil in contemporary culture. He highlights why we as humans unknowingly prefer this way of thinking and just how the “demonic” (pg. 3) use this emptiness inside them to contribute to this modern force in society. Eagleton utilizes question and answer to provoke thought in his readers, allusion to biblical, theological, and modern sources, and carries repetition throughout his piece as to create a tone of consistent awareness so that readers may not get lost in the detail. His audience, mostly consisting of religious progressives, would find a piece like

Since the beginning of time, people have shared stories about good and evil. These stories usually involved a hero and a villain fighting for their own motivations and goals. The hero/protagonist is usually given depth and character to be likeable and very relatable. However, this same depth and character is not usually seen in most antagonists. Most antagonists can be seen as one dimensional and were just used to present certain obstacles for the protagonist to overcome. British Literature has helped, in many ways, to question why the villains/antagonists are seen as “evil” and has also helped to ask the question if evil is all about perspective. One of the main theories on the subject of evil that is supported and learned about today is the theory by Thomas Hobbes. Thomas Hobbes believed that inside every human being is a natural state of evil. He believed that all humans are born evil. However, evil actions are made through choice. The people of Hrothgar, the monster Grendel, and King Macbeth were all influenced by desire to commit evil acts.

Evil has been a topic that has always been discussed with some amount of controversy—especially in the religious aspect. People who have the Judeo-Christian-Islamic perspective wrestle with the notion of how there can be an omniscient, omnipotent, and perfect God who allows such atrocities to happen in the world. It is also difficult to understand how God also allows natural evils — like hurricanes or cancer— to ruin people’s lives and harm people in any way. However, the discussion of evil expands far beyond the religious understanding. In the book, The Myth of Evil, by Phillip Cole, he explores the possibilities and possible theories of evil within the realm of religious belief and outside religious ideology. He recognizes there are four

In other words, some people refer to evil as sin and suffering; others think of it as a separation from God while still more people personify it in the form of satan. My purpose here is not to discuss what form evil may take in an individual's life even though it may come up periodically. The central fact remains that evil, in one form or another, does exist and anyone not willing to believe in this reality quite frankly lives in a different dimension. Either that, or they simply live in a total state of denial! Keeping all this in mind, what I want to accomplish in this paper is to first explore the idea that evil is a relative term that exists within the context of each situation. Ah, yes! Even as I wrote that last sentence, I could see the wheels turning in your head. But not to worry. I will clarify soon. From this point, I will seek the wisdom of people who have tried to answer these tough questions proposed on the first page, come to some more conclusions through personal interviews and then end on a more personal note, using the help of my life experience as a Christian. This topic hits me hard at times. I often find myself in reflection, trying to formulate an answer to the evil that I see, and yes, the evil that I do. This evil will sometimes leave me feeling totally powerless and at its mercy. Yet I never give up hope for I know that just through the process of writing this paper, some new insights will be

Humans view on the term ‘evil’ varies from culture to culture, some deny that evil exists and others explain how evil is the cause of our actions and as a form of punishment from God. In this essay, I will be answering the question “How do human beings explain evil?”

In order to better understand where evil comes from, it is necessary to examine whether or not human fault is present in a person at birth. In “Explaining Evil,” Mark Bernstein boldly states, “There is evil in the world… [and] instances of undeserved pain and suffering provide us with our most poignant examples” (151). These undeserved sufferings include natural disasters, child deformities, or even simply an animal getting hit by a car. However, while Bernstein and others may argue that child sickness and deformities are a result of some kind of evil power, the claim can also be made that these afflictions rather are the cause of evilness. In Richard III, Richard affirms,