• the basic idea more precisely • first order

Info iconThis preview shows pages 2–4. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon

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

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: • The Basic Idea More Precisely: • First Order Evil – physical pain or disease • First Order Good – pleasure, happiness • FOE – pain, suffering • FOG – pleasure, happiness • Second Order Good – virtues or qualities that elevate First Order Evil • Second Order Good – virtue, benevolence • SOG > FOG • The Second Order Good can only exist if First Order Good exists. • The Second Order Good > First Order Good or Evil • God’s Goodness – maximizing Second Order Good (a third order good as it were) • Criticism: • If the world was perfect the virtues would be useless. So their value is ultimately only instrumental. • God is not concerned with minimizing pain and suffering • There are also second order evils: malevolence, cruelty, cowardice, selfishness, that increase first order good and decrease second order good. • So why is God not decreasing second order evil? We are back where we began. Evil is due to human free will • The Basic Idea: it is better on the whole that men should act freely and err than they should be innocent automata, acting rightly in a wholly determined way. • Freedom – a third order good. • Freedom > Second Order Good if those produced without it • Second Order Evils – necessary consequences of freedom • Free will supposedly valuable • Without free will – second order good – virtue, benevolence • Criticism: • Could God not have made men so that they freely choose the right things? • If God made us what we are, did he not determine what we choose? So either he determined that we choose wrongly, or our choices are random as they are not grounded in what we are. • Randomness seems hardly more valuable than the second order Good. • Criticism: • Can an omnipotent God create men with free will? • That is what does “free” mean? Are we really free if God can control us? • If NO – then how come he created something he cannot control if he is omnipotent. • If YES – then how come he does not interfere with out evil (as we ourselves try to). Pages 109 – 118 What is the Argument from Evil? • (1) If God were to exist, then that being would be all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good. (2) If an all-PKG being existed, then there would be no evil. (3) There is evil.------------------------------- Hence, there is no God. • Deductively valid argument • If God is all-PKG, he has both the inclination and the ability to prevent evil from occurring • Conclusion: Two categories for evils: (1) evils that are brought into existence by human actions (2) evils that exist because of natural events that aren’t under human control What are possible reactions to the argument? • View that there is no difference between right and wrong • Assumption that premise 3 is correct is shared by many religious traditions • Reject premise 1 by interpreting the existence of evil as showing merely that if there is a God, then God isn’t all-PKG • Theodicy – try to explain why all-PKG God would allow evil to exist • Contemporary philosophers of religion use the term “defense” to describe second type of reply to Argument from Evil • Premise 2 makes an extreme claim...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page2 / 4

• The Basic Idea More Precisely • First Order Evil –...

This preview shows document pages 2 - 4. Sign up to view the full document.

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