Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The problem of evil, particularly natural evil – suffering arising from events independent of human action like earthquakes, tsunamis, or diseases – poses a significant challenge to theistic belief. Theodicy, derived from the Greek ‘theos’ (God) and ‘dike’ (justice), represents the attempt to justify God’s goodness and power in the face of such suffering. The question asks whether theists successfully explain natural evil as a necessary component of a greater good. While various arguments have been proposed, their efficacy in fully resolving the tension between divine attributes and worldly suffering remains a subject of intense philosophical debate.
Theistic Responses to Natural Evil
Theists have offered several explanations for the existence of natural evil. These can be broadly categorized as:
1. The Free Will Defense
This argument, popularized by Augustine and Alvin Plantinga, posits that God granted humans free will, and evil arises as a consequence of their misuse of this gift. However, this primarily addresses moral evil (caused by human actions), not natural evil. Extending it to natural evil suggests that a world with free will necessitates a world capable of natural disasters, but this connection feels tenuous and doesn’t explain the scale or indiscriminate nature of suffering.
2. The Soul-Making Theodicy
Developed by Irenaeus and later refined by John Hick, this theodicy argues that God allows evil to exist as a means of spiritual and moral development. Suffering provides opportunities for virtues like compassion, courage, and resilience to flourish. Natural evil, in this view, is a catalyst for ‘soul-making’. However, critics argue that the amount of suffering seems disproportionate to any potential soul-making benefits, and that some suffering simply destroys rather than builds character. The sheer scale of suffering in events like the Lisbon earthquake (1755) challenges this notion.
3. Punishment for Sin (Augustinian Theodicy)
Augustine argued that natural evil is a consequence of original sin, a corruption of the natural order resulting from Adam and Eve’s disobedience. This view is less prevalent today, as it struggles to explain the suffering of innocent creatures and the disproportionate impact on those who haven’t personally committed any sin. Furthermore, it relies on a literal interpretation of the biblical narrative, which is not universally accepted.
4. Aesthetic Argument
Some theists argue that evil is necessary for a complete and aesthetically pleasing universe. Just as shadows are necessary for a painting, evil provides contrast and highlights the goodness in the world. This argument is often criticized for being subjective and failing to adequately address the immense suffering involved.
Critiques and Limitations
Several philosophical challenges undermine the success of these theodicies:
- The Problem of Gratuitous Evil: Much suffering appears pointless and serves no discernible purpose.
- The Evidential Problem of Evil: The sheer quantity and intensity of evil provide strong evidence against the existence of an all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good God.
- Logical Inconsistency: Some argue that the existence of evil is logically incompatible with the traditional attributes of God.
Furthermore, the concept of a ‘necessary counterpart’ implies a pre-ordained plan where suffering is integral. This raises questions about God’s freedom and the meaningfulness of human agency. If suffering is necessary, is it truly a gift, or simply an unavoidable consequence of a divine design?
| Theodicy | Strength | Weakness |
|---|---|---|
| Free Will Defense | Addresses moral evil effectively. | Struggles to explain natural evil. |
| Soul-Making Theodicy | Provides a potential purpose for suffering. | Disproportionate suffering; doesn't explain all cases. |
| Punishment for Sin | Offers a traditional explanation. | Relies on specific theological beliefs; unjust to innocents. |
Conclusion
While theists offer various explanations for natural evil, none fully succeed in reconciling it with the traditional attributes of God in a way that satisfies all philosophical objections. The arguments often rely on assumptions about God’s purposes that are difficult to verify and struggle to account for the sheer scale and apparent pointlessness of much suffering. Ultimately, the problem of evil remains a profound and enduring challenge to theistic belief, prompting ongoing debate and diverse interpretations. A complete resolution may be beyond human comprehension, requiring a leap of faith or a re-evaluation of traditional theological concepts.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.