The Problem of Evil Essay examples

In his 2004 City Journal article, Theodore Dalrymple expresses his view on the tremendous decline in the quality of life in Great Britain. He believed that society has accepted the notion that people are not responsible for their own problems. Also, that it is the “moral cowardice of the intellectual and political elites” that perpetuates the social dynamics that are responsible for the continuing decline of British society. According to the author, a physician about to retire after a career treating criminal justice offenders and victims, there are several pervasive misconceptions that explain the continuing decline of British society.

The movie "High Noon" has interesting comparisons to the philosophies and views of Immanuel Kant and John Stuart Mill. It would be easy to analyze the lead character Kane as mirroring the philosophical views of Kant. This paper will analyze the somewhat contradictory actions of other characters which, to me, represent a quintessential truth about personal beliefs – that they are changed according to situation. I will be commenting on two characters in the movie which show a change in the views of the characters in relation to situational factors. We will be looking at Amy Kane and Mayor Jonas Henderson.

In “Reasonable Religious Disagreements,” Feldman discusses the role of intolerance and relativism in argumentation in regards to how epistemic peers who have a share of the same evidence reasonably maintain their own belief, all the while, maintaining that the other party of the disagreement is reasonable in their belief as well. This essay will concentrate on the benefits of Feldman’s observation and the benefits of critical thinking in argumentation as well as elaborate on the main reason as to why people so desperately agree to disagree in relation to media coverage.

There are numerous things that citizens of this world are afraid of. A huge example is public speaking. Getting up in front of many peers, friends, advisors, and role models can intimidate, frighten, or discourage us in many different ways. The fear that others will judge or think less of us is scary and can be a gigantic blow to our pride. Often times, feelings of anxiety join the scene, making the situation as terrible as it can possibly be. Many of these feelings that have been mentioned contribute to the reason why humans like to stay in their comfort zones and do the things that they have always done, for fear that people may judge them, or they might fail. Another common fear that people have is dying. For many religiously active people, this topic is the least of their worries, but for others, they can’t help but worry about what will become of them once they leave this earth. Will they be remembered for how amazing and confident they were? Will people feel a rush of relief and happiness because they

In the year 1654 at age 31, Blaise Pascal, the renowned mathematician physicist had religious experience that caused him to reorient his life towards writing a defense for the Christian faith. One of his most famous works was on the subject is “The Wager”, which argues, through cost-benefit Analysis, that individuals should take steps to believe in God. This entire argument hinges on the premise that epistemic reasoning is incapable of proving, with any real certainty, the existence of God; therefore, individuals must base their decision to believe, or not believe, on prudential reasoning. Beginning at the end of the twentieth century and continuing to the present day, scientist and

One of the most well known theories about the existence of God is Pascal’s Wager. Upon first look, this theory seems fairly sound, even if not overly convincing. Under more thorough inspection, however, it quickly becomes clear the theory is rather counter productive. Not only does the wager fail to prove the existence of God or anything about the true nature of God, it also fails to prove what it was created to prove. Aside from simply being ineffective, Pascal’s Wager also leads to serious doubts about the institution of religion in general. Firstly, I will discuss what exactly the wager is, and what it is trying to prove. Next comes the many objections and issues that are raised. Finally, I will prove why this leads to serious doubts about all of religion and why it might be best to abstain all together.

Evil no doubt has a strong presence and many theologians try to comprehend and offer a solution to the existence of evil. Evil has two forms which are known as the logical form of evil and the evidential form. These two forms of the problem of evil have been distinguished in order to understand the issue of evil. The main argument to the existence of an all good and powerful being is the existence of evil. If an omnipotent being exist evil would be presumed to be absent in our world, however evil remains present. Evil’s existence gives ground for atheism and the belief that an all powerful being does not exist.

Some people believe that there is an existing conflict between faith and reason, but not all. This is not limited only to those who identify as religious nor does it apply strictly to those who deny the existence of God. As written in the Bible, We are to have good reason for what we believe, and we are to be always ready to share that reason with other people (1 Peter 3:15). The argument of faith and reason is seen in numerous philosophical writings such as Blaise Pascal’s Faith is a Logical Bet or W.K. Clifford’s The Ethics of Belief. In both we find strengths and weaknesses which defend their individual beliefs based on reasoning and logical thinking.

The dilemma, put simply, is why should a God, who has a wholly good, moral character and is the creator of all things, allow the existence of evil? Reconciling an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God with the existence of evil (for we know from empirical evidence that evil undoubtedly exists) can leave us on the horns of a dilemma. Consider the two conclusions below:

“Truth, in matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived,” was a statement made by Oscar Wilde. (Dawkins, pg. 222) In Richard Dawkins book, “The God Delusion,” regards the argument of the supernatural being in religion being not feasible. Richard Dawkins proposes his argument “with rigor and wit, Dawkins eviscerates the arguments for religion and demonstrates the supreme improbability of the existence of a supreme being.” (Dawkins, 2008) Moreover, the author uses vital assessments by allocating the origins of the religion, analysis of the Darwinian natural selection and other metaphysicists that are the contemporary reasoning for phenomenal causes, and the justification of God’s existence. Therefore, the purpose of this

The area between good and evil are muddled with uncertainty and dualistic outcomes. Christopher Marlowe’s complex play, The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus, implores readers to evaluate the theological concepts of good versus evil. This play tells a story of an educated man who signs a deal with the devil in order to be on the same level as a God. Through this journey, Faustus fights with himself over the implications of his actions and becomes scared of his impending damnation. Despite a breach of contract, Faustus should be damned at the end of The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus based on the rules that were established and the general theological concepts of good and evil that are examined throughout the play.

It is said that evil days bring forth good men to match them. It is equally true that evil men bring forth evil days, and Reynold Walkden Staithes was an evil man that greatly magnified the evils of his days. The best thing anyone could say about him, and the best thing anyone ever did say about him, was that he was a Yorkshireman. After that, they were stuck for words. Stuck for commendable words, that is. They had plenty to say about him that was uncomplimentary. Most people feared him because he was mean and spiteful and exacted awful vengeance on those he knew to be and those he took to be his enemies. He trusted no one apart from men with whom he had done business for many years, and even then he suspicioned that they would do him

There are many people in this world, whether Christian or non-Christian, that are confused regarding the problem of evil. They wonder why God can allow the atrocities that happen. In order to understand why there is confusion, we must go back to the beginning. When God created the Garden of Eden and man and woman, he gave specific instructions to them. God warned man of the consequences of disobeying Him (Genesis 2). This is where the beginning of evil took place.

The Problem of Evil Argument is one that opposes the belief that there is an omniscient, omnibenevolent and omnipotent God. While there are varied retorts, in this essay, I will mention two significant objections to this opposition that I will then attempt to discredit. The first objection states that “God is inscrutable”, and will find fault with the argument’s first and third premises – I will respond to this objection by arguing that having a God who is incomprehensible is no better than having no God at all. The second objection deals with the notion of “free will” and will analyse the second premise – my response will state that God, as our creator, must be held accountable for our actions and cannot completely waive responsibility of his creations (Chapman, 2017). Therefore, I will have demonstrated that The Problem of Evil Argument does indeed show that God does not exist.

The concepts of good and evil exist within every society therefore there must exist some method of instruction about the path to goodness. Lao Tzu, the author of the Tao Te Ching, who defines good as having faith in the Tao to better the world and oneself, and Dante, who wrote The Divine Comedy and defines good as faith the way of heaven and hell and in the punishments of sinners, take very different approaches to defining the path to virtuousness. Lao Tzu defines what is good and focuses on the reward of achieving that goodness, while Dante defines the good by exemplifying the bad to inspire fear through the prospect of punishment. In the model of good versus evil one can focus on achieving good or avoiding evil by setting an example that appeals to peoples’ interest in bettering their own lives or in bettering their society. The good as defined by Lao Tzu can be more effectively and universally achieved through a system of reward that defines the good such as is done in the Tao Te Ching rather than using a system of punishment that defines good by exemplifying the bad through the sinners as Dante does.