Explain The Problem Of Evil Essay Caltech Thesis Deadline
One point in this regard is that while the value of free will may be thought sufficient to counterbalance minor evils, it is less obvious that it outweighs the negative attributes of evils such as rape and murder.
Particularly egregious cases known as horrendous evils, which "[constitute] prima facie reason to doubt whether the participant’s life could (given their inclusion in it) be a great good to him/her on the whole," have been the focus of recent work in the problem of evil.
There are also many discussions of evil and associated problems in other philosophical fields, such as secular ethics, The experiential problem is the difficulty in believing in a concept of a loving God when confronted by suffering or evil in the real world, such as from epidemics, or wars, or murder, or rape or terror attacks wherein innocent children, women, men or a loved one becomes a victim.
This argument is of the form modus tollens, and is logically valid: If its premises are true, the conclusion follows of necessity.
Both absolute versions and relative versions of the evidential problems of evil are presented below. Rowe: The second version of the problem of evil applied to animals, and avoidable suffering experienced by them, is one caused by some human beings, such as from animal cruelty or when they are shot or slaughtered.
This version of the problem of evil has been used by scholars including John Hick to counter the responses and defenses to the problem of evil such as suffering being a means to perfect the morals and greater good because animals are innocent, helpless, amoral but sentient victims.
Attempts to show the contrary have traditionally been discussed under the heading of theodicy.
Among the most popular versions of the "greater good" response are appeals to the apologetics of free will.
Theologians will argue that since no one can fully understand God's ultimate plan, no one can assume that evil actions do not have some sort of greater purpose.
To show that the first premise is plausible, subsequent versions tend to expand on it, such as this modern example: Both of these arguments are understood to be presenting two forms of the 'logical' problem of evil.
They attempt to show that the assumed propositions lead to a logical contradiction and therefore cannot all be correct.