The Problem of Evil
The central challenge to theism arising from the apparent inconsistency between the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, wholly good God and the existence of evil and suffering.
Definition
The set of philosophical problems concerning whether, and how, the existence of evil counts against or is compatible with belief in a perfectly good, all-powerful, and all-knowing God.
Scope
This area covers the logical problem of evil, which alleges a strict contradiction in theistic belief, and the evidential problem, which treats evil as inductive evidence against God. It covers the principal theistic responses: defenses such as the free will defense that aim to show consistency, and theodicies such as the soul-making theodicy that offer reasons God might permit evil. It does not cover the existence arguments treated in a separate area.
Sub-topics
Core questions
- Is the existence of evil logically incompatible with an omnipotent and wholly good God?
- Does the amount and distribution of suffering make God's existence improbable?
- Can free will explain moral evil without compromising God's goodness?
- Is gratuitous or seemingly pointless suffering, especially of innocents and animals, reconcilable with theism?
Key theories
- Free will defense
- Plantinga argues that a world containing free creatures capable of moral good is more valuable than one without, and that God could not guarantee such freedom while preventing all moral evil, so the coexistence of God and evil is logically possible.
- Soul-making theodicy
- Hick, developing an Irenaean tradition, argues that a world with hardship and suffering is necessary for the moral and spiritual growth of free persons toward likeness to God, so evil serves a justifying developmental purpose.
History
The problem is traced to a dilemma attributed to Epicurus and was central to Leibniz's eighteenth-century Theodicy, which coined the term and argued this is the best of all possible worlds. The modern analytic debate was framed by Mackie's 1955 statement of the logical problem; Plantinga's free will defense is widely held to have answered the logical version, after which Rowe shifted the debate to the evidential problem.
Debates
- Whether the logical problem has been solved
- Mackie argued evil and an omnipotent good God are strictly inconsistent; most philosophers now hold that Plantinga's free will defense shows their consistency, moving the debate to evidential considerations.
- Whether apparently gratuitous evil is evidence against God
- Rowe argues that instances of seemingly pointless suffering make God's existence improbable; skeptical theists reply that we are not positioned to judge whether such evils lack a God-justifying reason.
Key figures
- Epicurus
- Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
- J. L. Mackie
- Alvin Plantinga
- John Hick
- William Rowe
Related topics
Seminal works
- mackie1955
- plantinga1974gfe
- rowe1979
Frequently asked questions
- What is the difference between a defense and a theodicy?
- A defense aims only to show that God and evil are logically compatible, without claiming to state God's actual reasons; a theodicy goes further and attempts to give the actual or plausible reasons why God permits evil.
- Is the problem of evil only a problem for theists?
- The logical and evidential problems target classical theism specifically, but the broader question of how to make sense of suffering arises for many worldviews; the philosophical debate centers on whether evil counts against an omnipotent, wholly good God.