Evil and Suffering

Personally, I think that Evil and Suffering is one of the easiest units for the ‘RPQ’ section of Higher RMPS. There’s really one question – who is most to blame: humans, God, or both? The content remains the same for any version of the question it’s just the evaluation that needs to change i.e. respond to the question asked.

In this example, I’ve written an essay that focuses on whether the blame can be placed equally on God and humans. But here’s a challenge – delete those evaluation sentences and replace them with a sentences that completely blame God or completely blame humans.

How far can responsibility for suffering and evil lie with both God and humans?

Evil can be categorised into two types:  Natural evil with occurs as a result of the way the world works, for example, earthquakes or volcano’s erupting. KU Whereas moral evil occurs as a result of human choice, for example someone stealing or committing assault. KU Both of these types of evil lead to suffering – but the question arises as who is really responsible.

Epicurus wrote that ‘If God if willing to prevent evil but not able, then he is impotent. And if God is able but not willing then he is malevolent. And if he is both, whence then is evil.’ KU  William Mackie raised a similar argument in his inconsistency triad highlighting that as we cannot deny the existence of evil, then we must question God. KU

This leads to a number of possible conclusions, either a God with those attributes does not exist and this has an obvious impact on believers as it would mean the thing they praise is incoherent. A Or another possible implication is that there must be a reason for evil existing – and that reason must be a loving one that allows some kind of greater good. A  But this also creates a further issue as how can a loving God allow evils like cancer in children? What possible ‘good’ can be found to justify that? A

If we conclude that God does not exist, then the responsibility of suffering and evil cannot lie with him even to the extent of sharing a small part – and I think we must put the blame solely on humans for moral evil, and must just accept natural evil as a brute fact. E

However, if God does exist, there is also the possibility that he simply does not possess the attributes that people have claimed Him to have. Perhaps he is not ‘omni-benevolent’ (all-loving) and is actually ‘malevolent’ as Epicurus suggested. A

I think this shows that both God and humans can be seen to be responsible, because we no longer need to show that God is remotely loving and therefore would create a system in which extreme evils are possible and naturally occur. E

One way people have tried to explain the co-existence of a loving God and the extremes of evil is through the free will defence. This is the idea that God allowed humans the ability to choose their actions and control their own destiny. KU  For true free will to exist, there must be a choice that is genuinely different i.e. the choice between good and bad. KU Richard Swinburne make the point that if we asked God to lessen the scale of this choice (by making evil less extreme) this would be like making a ‘toy world’. KU He said that this would turn God into an ‘overprotective parent’ who doesn’t allow their child out of their sight which in turn hampers all chance of development. KU

This defence explains the existence of moral evil, but also leads to the implication that natural evil needs to exist because humans are part of the natural system too. There needs to be a duality in all things so that choices can be made. A Additionally, it also logically explains death because if someone had the chance to make infinite choices then this would limit the level of our responsibility – because in a limited life, you’ve got to make each choice worthwhile. A

I think that this shows that both humans and God share the responsibility for evil. God is to blame because He gave humans free will but humans are then to blame because they are the ones misusing that free will. E But I also think that God should be seen to hold the greater share in this because He is omniscient and will have known how great the levels of evil would get, and as an omnipotent being, I think that he should’ve made a better system. So I do blame Him more than humans. E

Augustine tried to claim that God wasn’t to blame because evil isn’t actually a ‘thing’ but rather is a ‘privation’  i.e. it is simply an absence of good. KU He believed that evil only appeared when Adam and Eve chose not to be good i.e. by disobeying God and eating from the tree of good and evil. KU He concluded that we were ‘seminally present’ in Adam when he created the original sin and as a result have inherited that from him. KU

This means that natural evil is justified because it only became disordered through Adam’s actions and it stays this way because as his ancestors, we deserve to face those consequences A.

This argument obviously attempts to blame humans for evil and not God, but I think it is absurd. A loving God would not continue to punish someone’s ancestors for their sin. But I do agree with the conclusion humans are to blame – but not the reason why. I believe Evolution has shown that this literal Biblical account cannot be true and therefore don’t think there is any need for God – and that humans must be entirely to blame. E

KU = 11 (10)

A = 7 (5)

E = 5