Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Counterarguments (blog 6)
In blog 5 I stated that evil is necessary for the developement of moral character. Some people believe that if we did not have evil in the world then we would have a world filled with nothing but good people. I do not think this is a valid argument. First of all, we wouldn't even have "good" without evil existing. That would be like saying, if left did not exist, everyone would be right handed. You cannot have one without the other. Furthermore, people only have the opportunity to be good if evil is also an option.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Is evil necessary for the development of moral character? (blog 5)
Evil is certainly necessary for the development of our character. The only way for us to build character is through overcoming adversities. Rachels describes how if we lived in a perfect world, with no evil whatsoever, then we would not have many of the good characteristics that we have today. In a world with no hunger, no crime, and no ill effects, we would never have a reason to help anyone or do anything “good” because there would be nothing to overcome. A person could never be brave if there was nothing to fear, could never be heroic if there was no one that needed saving, and could never help someone who is sick if there were no diseases. If there were no adversities to overcome, there would be no way to build a good moral character. (36-37) When you really think about it, would you even want to live in a world without evil? I d not think that I would.
Works Cited
Rachels, James, and Stuart Rachels. Problems from Philosophy. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.
Works Cited
Rachels, James, and Stuart Rachels. Problems from Philosophy. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Blog 4
Below are some concepts from philosophy, their definitions, and a few words about their relevance to my topic.
1. The Problem of Evil
Definition: “The God of classical theism is believed to be omnipotent, omniscient, and wholly good. Many thoughtful people maintain that such beliefs are in tension with certain beliefs about evil.” (90)
Relevance: This is going to be the basis of my topic. Everything else will have to revolve around the idea of whether a wholly good God could have a way or a reason to create evil.
2. The Free Will Defense
Definition: Although some may think this has something to do with defending our right to make our own decisions, it is actually part of a philosophical argument that claims our God-given free will as a reason for evil.
Relevance: This will be a helpful part of my paper because so many people want to believe that they have free will. They do not want to think that they are “destined” to do things in life. They do not want to feel like they are robots, doing what they are programmed to do and nothing more.
3. The Evidential Problem of Gratuitous Evil
Definition: A philosophical argument that probes the question that even if some evil has to exist, why does so much pointless evil exist?
Relevance: Basically an expansion upon the argument that says evil is necessary. Without evil there would be no good, obviously. Why so much evil then? Couldn’t we have a little less?
4. The Task of Theodicy
Definition: Describes how theodicy must explain evil using elements “drawn from Scripture, church doctrine, our common moral experience, etc.” (95-96)
Relevance: Will be relevant to the topic because since all the arguments are based on the existence of God, they must be addressed from a religious stand point.
5. The Existential Problem of Evil
Definition: “…happy people who do not regret their own individual existence cannot meaningfully raise a problem of evil…” (97)
Relevance: Will tie in nicely to show that the problem of evil does not necessarily exist for everyone.
Work Cited
Rachels, James, and Stuart Rachels. The Truth about the World. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.
1. The Problem of Evil
Definition: “The God of classical theism is believed to be omnipotent, omniscient, and wholly good. Many thoughtful people maintain that such beliefs are in tension with certain beliefs about evil.” (90)
Relevance: This is going to be the basis of my topic. Everything else will have to revolve around the idea of whether a wholly good God could have a way or a reason to create evil.
2. The Free Will Defense
Definition: Although some may think this has something to do with defending our right to make our own decisions, it is actually part of a philosophical argument that claims our God-given free will as a reason for evil.
Relevance: This will be a helpful part of my paper because so many people want to believe that they have free will. They do not want to think that they are “destined” to do things in life. They do not want to feel like they are robots, doing what they are programmed to do and nothing more.
3. The Evidential Problem of Gratuitous Evil
Definition: A philosophical argument that probes the question that even if some evil has to exist, why does so much pointless evil exist?
Relevance: Basically an expansion upon the argument that says evil is necessary. Without evil there would be no good, obviously. Why so much evil then? Couldn’t we have a little less?
4. The Task of Theodicy
Definition: Describes how theodicy must explain evil using elements “drawn from Scripture, church doctrine, our common moral experience, etc.” (95-96)
Relevance: Will be relevant to the topic because since all the arguments are based on the existence of God, they must be addressed from a religious stand point.
5. The Existential Problem of Evil
Definition: “…happy people who do not regret their own individual existence cannot meaningfully raise a problem of evil…” (97)
Relevance: Will tie in nicely to show that the problem of evil does not necessarily exist for everyone.
Work Cited
Rachels, James, and Stuart Rachels. The Truth about the World. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2008.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
