Comparing Evil And Suffering In The Monadology By Leibniz

The beauty of the problem of evil is its simplicity. David Hume displays the problem well by questioning the existence of God and evil. For, if both God and evil exist, God must either be “willing to prevent evil, but not able” or “able, but not willing”. Hume shows that there seems to be a problem with God and evil coexisting. For, with an all good entity

All throughout our history, we have come to label events, object and people as either good or evil/bad. We tend to believe that the world itself is driven by good forces and evil ones. Since this is a term we often take for granted, it should not be debatable, and all of us should have the same concept about it. Sadly enough that is not true. Societies and culture shape our understanding of evil.

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

People are always getting into situations that have two possible ways to go. That person can choose the right thing to do or the worse. There have been numerous amounts of people asking the question “what is good and evil?” Many have tried conducting experiments to try and find the roots of what makes people good/evil? Evil acts and evil itself can be shown through the social, economic, and mental environment.

In the beginning all was good; there was no evil. The start of evil was marked when a jealous angel, Satan, desired equality to God. He thrust an ever-lasting battle into play when he battled God for supremacy. One-third of all the angels in heaven, including Satan, were thrown from heaven onto Earth. God’s perfect creation became faulted when the fallen angel, Satan, tempted Adam and Eve into eating a forbidden fruit. By partaking of the forbidden fruit, sin was born on Earth. The birthing of such catastrophe--evil--has affected even the modern millennial generation. That occurrence marked the beginning of the perennial conflict of good versus evil--light versus darkness. The conflicts are traced all the way back to the very beginning

In this paper, I will break apart J. L. Mackie’s stern defense of the logical problem of evil, which he uses to suggest the God does not exist. I will attempt to defend the notion that both God and evil, in the form of human creation, can exist in the world by way of suggesting that freewill is the answer. Furthermore, I will strengthen the argument for freewill against Mackie’s defense, which suggests that the argument of freewill also compromises the Omni-three nature of God. In part, I will back freewill by using Mackie’s own logic against him. In its totality, I will build up a strong force against the logical problem of evil, leaving room for both the existence of human formed evil and God in this world under the

Evil is something that exists in many forms. From big evils like Hitler’s Holocaust and slavery, to small evils like getting a papercut and getting stuck in the rain (perhaps to some this might be a big evil), evil is basically anything that is not good. For theologians, evil poses several problems, most notably when it comes to the existence of God.

When we are discussing the problem of evil, we are specifically discussing a God that is omniscient, omnipotent, and perfectly good. A God that is perfectly good would not allow suffering to exist, and any minute amount of suffering that exists disproves God’s existence. Unless, the suffering is justified with an adequate reason. However, even then there seems to be large amounts of evil in the world that seems unnecessary for any good reason. By evil and suffering I mean death, pain, and disease. I will be using these terms interchangeably. In the problem of evil, many arguments are placed in order to find a justification for the evil that exists. However,

Widespread controversy surrounds the Problem of Evil and the philosophical premises constructed. Devine entities are perceivably omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent, although the extent to which an omni-God of such can coexist with suffering is an extensively debatable topic. The objective of this essay’s argument is to posit a range of deliberation regarding the integrity of various theoretical claims, where if God truly existed, would this subjectively “all-good” entity allow evil to exist? 2. Problem of Evil

In the article Evil and Omnipotence , J. L. Mackie argues his version of the LPE. He defines “evil” to be concepts that good can abolish or get rid of. For the sake of this paper I define Mackie’s concept of evil as pain and suffering. In Evil and Omnipotence “Good” is defined to be the taking away of pain and suffering. This definition of “good” and “evil” allows this argument to become valid :

When talking about the existence of God there is always this problem of evil in the world. The people who already believe tend to not answer the question with anything very satisfying for a nonbeliever. In Leibnizs "God, Evil and The Best of All Possible Worlds" it is best addressed that there are the question of why God is allowing such evil in the world. Where as Saint Anselm doesn’t even acknowledge that God is anything but great. However, both of their arguments are still not to par for anyone looking for answers to the question of 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 for anyone to believe in the existence of God. (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evil/). There are people that do not believe in God because they cannot physically see or touch him. Many people want to be able to do this before they can fully and truly believe in his existence. The evils that occur within the world that are seen as pointless evils but in fact they have a purpose to bring about good. A person may not understand the reason for these evils but God has a purpose for these evils.

Evil, a “thing” we all fear that comes in many shapes and sizes, the most malevolent “being” in the universe. Why is it here, why does it exist? We can all give examples of evil actions, people, things, and places that we as a society believe are truly evil, but it is important to understand where did we conceived these ideas. Theodicy is defined as the many different views on the existence of evil, but we must go more in depth in order to correctly define what is good and bad. Evil is known to be the source of bad and God, the creator of heaven and earth, the divine being, is the counter opposite of evil.

Explain the problem of evil. Do you think this presents a problem for belief in God? Why or why not?

LEIBNIZ’S CONCEPTION OF THE PROBLEM OF EVIL BY OKOJIE E. PETER epo4escriva@yahoo.com MAY 2013 INTRODUCTION For many centuries, philosophers have been discussing evil, how it exists in the world, and how this relates to God. The discussion on evil and its relations to us is not an easy one though. It is commonly called the problem of evil. The problem of evil in contemporary philosophy is generally regarded as an argument for atheism. The atheist contends that God and evil are incompatible, and given that evil clearly exists, God cannot exist. The problem is generally used to disprove God’s existence by showing an inconsistency between an all-powerful, all-good, and all-knowing God; and the existence of evil. Philosophers over the centuries