It should entail a world with no evil, instead heavily endorsed with goodness. Mackie identifies this when he states “Good is opposed to evil, in such a way that a good thing always eliminates evil as far
Aquinas approaches natural evil in a different way, because he views it as less of a punishment and more of an opportunity for goodness; “many good things would be missed if God permitted no evil to exist” (Aquinas, 1917, 1A, 49, 1). Sometimes a seemingly evil event, such as an earthquake, inspires people around the world to come together and help the country in need; therefore, the evil created an opportunity for goodness and unity, which is essentially God’s ultimate plan. When viewing evil through Aquinas’ approach it is notable that God is almost praised for including evil in our world, because it allows humanity to distinguish a difference between good and bad; therefore, humanity has a greater chance of appreciating the goodness in the world. Because of this, God’s existence is not only justified, but evil is shown as an essential part in making the world a peaceful place, rather than the initial idea that evil is a problem for the
Walsch clarifies we must practice extreme judgment in order to determine right from wrong. God explains he would not keep an individual from creating, experiencing and knowing the truth. He explains that he does not implement rules for his follows to obey because that would place a limitation. If Walsch’s free will theodicy was not valid, there would be rules and consequences for how we live our lives. He heavily relies on the idea of self.
Euthyphro’s Dilemma is when Socrates asks Euthyphro, “Does God love goodness because it is good, or is it good because God loves it?” Euthyphro’s Dilemma is that God determines what is good and evil, right and wrong. This dilemma challenges the Divine Command theory because according to Euthyphro’s Dilemma we would be obligated to do something wrong because God commanded it. This conflicts with the Divine Command theory because it would imply that cruelty could be morally right if God told us to do so. The idea that cruelty can be morally right goes up against the belief in the Divine Command Theory because it proposes that an action's status that is morally good is equivalent to whether it is commanded by God
A theodicy attempts to explain why a just and good God would ever allow the existence of evil on earth. The Free Will Theodicy states that the reason that God would not prevent suffering is that “the suffering of the innocent is justified by the existence of free will”. This theodicy also claims that there are natural evils (such as accidents, diseases, etc.) and moral evils, and that moral evils only exist due to humans misusing their sense of free will. According to the play Macbeth by William Shakespeare the awareness that a deed is immoral is what makes fulfilling the deed evil. Nothing an animal does can be seen as cruel because their actions are purely instinctual, mankind is unique in that we have free will and sense of right and wrong, which means that we are the only species capable of true cruelty or evil.
JL Mackie was persuasive in his argument by showing that belief in an almighty God is not rational. He proves this by posing the problem of evil. According to JL Mackie, if God exists and is omniscient, omnipotent, and good then evil would not exist. However, evil exists in this world, sometimes in the form of undeserved suffering (diseases that affect humans, earthquakes, famines ...) and others perpetrated by man (murders, wars ...). If God exists and has the capability to be powerful, good, omniscient and omnipotent, why would he let evil be perpetrated?
Why the Problem of Evil Suggests There is No God The typical definition of God is an omniscient, omnipotent, perfectly good being. A perfectly good God is expected to protect His creations from evil and/or stop any form of it from happening, but that is not the case in our world. People are responsible for so much pain and suffering today that the problem of evil as John Hick explained is the most believable explanation as to why I do not think there is a God.
There Will Come Soft Rains by Ray Bradbury and The Shawl by Cynthia Ozick express selfishness through humanity’s impact on their surroundings; moreover, humanity give peace to nature when their creations caused their extinction and humans going against their own kind to survive in desperate times are experiences told through either nature or a human’s point of view. Selfishness is conveyed in There Will Come Soft Rains through humans ignoring the fact that nature could´ve been abolished while they had their nuclear war: ¨The house stood alone in a city of rubble and ashes. This was the one house left standing. At night the ruined city gave off a radioactive glow which could be seen for miles¨ (Bradbury 1).
Descartes gave a few arguments that God exists and is real. Desocrates believed our idea of God is that God is a perfect being, he believed he is more perfect to exist than not to exist. Desocrates also believed that God is a infinite being. Descartes idea would be that God gave us this idea to type this paragraph about him so he must be real. When he thinks negative of an idea or thought he wonders if an evil demon plotted those thoughts.
“Defining Evil” Summary Stephen De Wijze piece titled “Defining Evil” explores the definition of an old saying, “dirty hands” in which people who have committed evil crimes lose moral innocence and have a permanent stain on their morality. The main idea being, what should be considered evil. Wijze recalls three conditions throughout his text to describe what is considered evil, he labels them as A,B and C. Moreover, Condition A is the “Deliberate violation of a person(s) with the intention to dehumanise.” (Wijze 218) Condition B is that “The action or project will inflict one or more of “The Great Harms” to sentient beings with the relevant moral standing.”
Evil has been intertwined into our vocabulary from a very young age to describe villains in books and movies. To declare a person evil is to judge only by the acts of evil and nothing else. Thus, no one can be evil for an individual has performed at least one act of kindness in their lifetime Evil is not a spectrum but a lens; it depends on how you look at it. The phrase "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" is an example of seeing evil through the different lens.
Hannah Arendt believes that evil is irrational and can spread from one person to another very easily. Arendt believes that evil can only be extreme. Although evil can be very extreme such as owning slaves, it may only seem evil to those who oppose it. Evil actions are those to be considered inhumane by many peoples perspectives. Many events in history can be looked back upon as evil.
There are people who define evil as a bad vibe, and others define it as a disaster of nature. On the article, “What do we Mean by Evil” Rollo Roming says,” in centuries past, “Evil” was used to describe all manner of ills, from natural disasters to the impulse to do something wrong” He speaks about different ways that people define evil in their own point of view. A tornado destroying half of a town can be called evil done by Mother Nature, and one person robbing a bank can be called evil since crimes are what people define as evil. Dr. Jekyll shows how the evil was always inside of his mind but he never expressed it, instead, he created a monster of himself not letting people find out who was behind that monster.