What is Digg?Sponsored by Gilt Man
It's a Gilt Man's world view!
giltman.com - Get gear and gadgets at up to 70% off. Shop like a guy, dress like a man. You're invited.
5 Comments
- cranium, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The problem of evil is not all that interesting in light of the fact that there isn't a shred of objective evidence for the existence of the supernatural in any form.
However, Epicurus' riddle still has not been suitably answered. An appeal to the metaphysics embodied in the notion that god created/allows evil "for the greater good" carries no more weight than the equally metaphysical notion that the answer is "not understandable by humans" or "unknowable". All of these notions are founded in the ether, as it were, and presenting any one of them as axiomatic is an affront to reason itself. - Cyre, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Umm, because there's no such critter?
- spanner, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Frank thats a great argument.
I think the reply is that the very nature itself is no longer that of God's creation. It was poisoned when sin entered the world. Therefore there is evil, such as the fawn in the forest dying, that was not caused by God. This evil must exist until the world is renewed again, its symbiotic with the world we live in. So God didn't create evil, but he does allow it to exist because it serves a higher / greater purpose. One of the side effects of it is that some beings sufffer undeservedly, (such as people with disease) but thats not of God's doing.
The world we are in is in some way shattered, like a broken mirror, we see the pieces God created, the good parts in the glass, but between the shards lie breaks where things are not as they were before.The mirror will not be restored in this world. - FranksValli, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This version of the Problem of Evil isn't really seen as a problem anymore in philosophy. So it's been largely accepted that there is no logical contradiction in an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God and the existence of evil in the world.
Spanner brings up the Free Will Defense, which partially addresses the problem: a lot of evil in the world is propogated by freely acting agents, not by God. That God doesn't prevent them from doing so doesn't mean he doesn't necessarily exist. For instance, perhaps God has good reasons for allowing evil.
But what about natural evils and suffering, such as a fawn in the forest dying a very painful death in a forest fire (I think this is Rowe's original argument)? Such suffering doesn't have anything to do with our free will, and yet why would God allow this kind of suffering to exist? This is called the Evidential Argument From Evil and is the current variant of the original problem.
Anyhow, hope that helps anyone who's interested in the topic but doesn't know where to start in researching it. - spanner, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1umm because he gave humanity free will to choose. So evil exists to enable humanity to chose either it or God.
Without evil, you have no choice, and then humanity is nothing less than robots without free will.
quite simple really ....
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is