The problem of evil

Explain why the problem of evil presents a difficulty for classical theism. Critically
evaluate how a defender of theism responds to the problem of evil. Does the problem
of evil make belief in God, as affirmed by classical theism, irrational?

The problem of evil: If God is fully good, all-knowing and powerful why does evil exist.

Make Sure to get a atheist stances and a thesis stance and my position at the end which is I don’t agree with the problem of evil and I believe God to exist and God and evil are compatible … all that good stuff.

REQUIRED SOURCES:
Source #1 – Encyclopedia Article. One of your sources must be an encyclopedia·
article, either from The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
(http://www.iep.utm.edu/) [IEP] or The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
(http://plato.stanford.edu) [SEP]. These are online, peer-reviewed, academic sources.
An encyclopedia article is often a good place to start a thesis defense paper, because
it will give you an overview of the major issues, positions, and arguments on your
topic.
Source #2 – Primary Source. One of your sources must be a primary source that·
takes, and argues for, a position on the issue addressed by your thesis defense paper.
For example, if you write a thesis defense paper on Kant’s Categorical Imperative,
you should use Kant’s Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals as your primary
source. If you write a paper on Freedom and Moral Responsibility, you might choose
James’ Dilemma of Determinism as your primary source, or you might choose Stace’s
Religion and the Modern Mind as your primary source. In your own thesis, you may
either agree or disagree with the position taken by this primary source.
Source #3 – Alternative Viewpoint (Primary or Secondary Source). One of your·
sources must be either a primary source or an academic journal article that takes,
and argues for, a different position on the issue than the position taken by the
first primary source (that is, by Source #2, just mentioned).

Secondary Sources – Encyclopedia Articles
Beebe, James R. “Logical Problem of Evil.” The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, www.iep.utm.edu/evil-log/.

Tooley, Michael. “The Problem of Evil.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2015 Edition), edited by Edward N. Zalta, plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/evil/.

Trakakis, Nick. “The Evidential Problem of Evil.” The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, www.iep.utm.edu/evil-evi/.

Secondary Sources – Journal Articles
NOTE: Please use the PDF files found here, and when you cite these sources refer to the page numbers of these PDF files so it will be easy for me to track down your citations. When building your Works Cited page for your Thesis Defense Paper,  you may copy and paste these entries. They are properly formatted for APA Style.

Adams, Marilyn McCord, and Stewart Sutherland. “Horrendous Evils and the Goodness of God.” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, vol. 63, 1989, pp. 297-323.

Instructor’s Note: This source is really two articles in one (and if you interact with both parts in your paper, I will let you count this as two sources). In the first part, Adams (a Christian philosopher) is interested in defending the rationality of belief in God (specifically, Christian belief) in the face of what she calls “horrendous evils”. She criticizes some standard “solutions” to the problem of evil, and then she offers her own answer to the problem of evil: that Christian theology has resources to explain how God might defeat evil “by integrating participation in horrendous evils into a person’s relationship with God” (Adams & Sutherland 307). In the second part, Sutherland critically responds to Adams by giving a different account of “horrendous evil” and arguing that the way she proposes God might defeat such evil is unsatisfying. The essential question Sutherland raises seems to be whether truly horrendous evil “which appeared to be beyond reparation, is in fact beyond reparation” (Adams & Sutherland 322).
Adams and Sutherland – Horrendous Evils and the Goodness of God.pdf
Howard-Snyder, Daniel, and Frances Howard-Snyder. “Is Theism Compatible with Gratuitous Evil?” American Philosophical Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 2, 1999, pp. 115-130.

Instructor’s Note: Daniel and Frances Howard-Snyder are Christian philosophers who defend the rationality of theism against the problem of evil. They begin the paper with Rowe’s evidential argument from evil (from Rowe’s essay “The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism”). They consider responses to Rowe from three other philosophers who defend belief in God: Peterson, Hasker, and Van Inwagen. They ultimately find Peterson’s and Hasker’s responses to the problem of evil unsuccessful, but they present Van Inwagen as having effectively shown that theists do not need to accept the second premise of Rowe’s argument.
Howard-Snyders – Is Theism Compatible with Gratuitous Evil.pdf
Stump, Eleonore. “Aquinas on the Sufferings of Job.” The Evidential Argument from Evil, edited by Daniel Howard-Snyder, Indiana University Press, 1996, 49-68.

Instructor’s Note: Eleonore Stump is an expert on Thomas Aquinas. In this article Stump explains how Aquinas interpreted the biblical book of Job, which addresses the problem of suffering. She points out that Aquinas sees the central question in Job not whether or not God is good (or whether or not God exists); rather for Aquinas the question is whether Job’s suffering gives us reason to doubt that God is providentially directing human affairs (Stump 50). Understanding Aquinas’ response to the problem of suffering in Job requires understanding Aquinas’ (Christian & Aristotelian) view of human happiness (Stump 53-54). Rather than puzzling over the question “Why do bad things happen to good people?”, Aquinas holds the view that good people are more likely to suffer than others are (Stump 55-56).
Stump – Aquinas on the Sufferings of Job.pdf
Swinburne, Richard. “Some Major Strands of Theodicy.” The Evidential Argument from Evil, edited by Daniel Howard-Snyder, Indiana University Press, 1996, 30-48.

Instructor’s Note: In this article, Swinburne attempts to argue that “evils of the kind and quantity we find on Earth serve greater goods”, so that God is justified in allowing those evils. He argues that there are good states of affairs “which a good God might well seek to bring about and which do in fact occur on Earth” and that many of these good states “could not be realized without the occurrence (or possible occurrence) of corresponding evils” (Swinburne 1996: 31).
Swinburne – Some Major Strands of Theodicy.pdf

Item
Primary Sources
NOTE: Please use the PDF files found here, and when you cite these sources refer to the page numbers of these PDF files so it will be easy for me to track down your citations. When building your Works Cited page for your Thesis Defense Paper,  you may copy and paste these entries. They are properly formatted for APA Style.

Hick, John. “Soul Making Theodicy.” Philosophy of Religion: Selected Readings, 3rd ed., edited by Michael Peterson, et al., Oxford University Press, 2007, 341-353.

Hick – Soul Making Theodicy.pdf
Mackie, J. L. “Evil and Omnipotence.” Mind, vol. 64, no. 254, 1955, pp. 200-212.

evil-and-omnipotence.pdf
Rowe, William L. “The Problem of Evil and Some Varieties of Atheism.” American Philosophical Quarterly, vol. 16, no. 4, 1979, pp. 335-341.
William Rowe Evidential Problem of Evil 1979.pdf
Swinburne, Richard. “The Problem of Evil.” Introduction to Philosophy. The University of Toledo, Oct. 2017, blackboard.utdl.edu/bbcswebdav/courses/PHIL2200901201740/Swinburne – The Problem of Evil.pdf.
Swinburne – The Problem of Evil.pdf

 

buy custom essay