phil paper #2 - Jonathan Lee 11/01/10 Philosophy 232 Loeb...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Jonathan Lee 11/01/10 Philosophy 232 Loeb section 002 Paper #2, Topic #5 One of the greatest detractors for believing in a God that is specifically omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient, is the existence of evil. If God were really to be omnibenevolent, or all good, He would not want evil to occur. If God were really to be omnipotent, He would be able to prevent evil. If God were omniscient, He would know whether or not evil would occur if He does not prevent it. Therefore, if an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient God exists, there would be no evil. However evil does exist, therefore that specific kind of a God cannot exist. One of the proposed solutions to the problem of moral evil, and not natural evil, is the free will defense which states that moral evil is an unpreventable byproduct of free will 1 . Also that “God, in creating humans who (of logical necessity) cannot choose for themselves the kind of world into which they are to come, plausibly exhibits his goodness in making for them the heroic choice that they come into a risky world where they may have to suffer for the good of others.” (110) In other words, a world with free will and the possibility of moral evil is better than a world without free will and the possibility of moral evil. It does not seem logical to try and tackle the 2 nd point that the PFWD makes: that on the proverbial scale, free will and moral evil is better than no free will and no moral evil. Even though the praiseworthy results of free will such as donating blood to the sick or looking after a person with down syndrome are clearly evident, just as the moral evils such as stealing a bicycle or beating up an old women are apparent, it seems extremely difficult or even impossible to the human eye to determine which is more prevalent in the world. As a finite being, I cannot process everything that happens in the world. Also, no human can be purely objective. The foster child 1 For the sake of the flow of the paper, a proponent of the free will defense will simply be shorthanded as PFWD
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
that was adopted by a loving family living in the suburbs of Pennsylvania will probably have a more difficult time seeing the evils of the world rather than a ten year old Jew moving away from the ghettos of Warsaw to the Auschwitz concentration camp where all his loved ones are set to be systemically killed without any remorse. It would be much more definitive to show that either
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 01/16/2012 for the course PHILOSOPHY 232 taught by Professor Loeb during the Fall '10 term at University of Michigan.

Page1 / 5

phil paper #2 - Jonathan Lee 11/01/10 Philosophy 232 Loeb...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online