Do Theodicists Mean What They Say?
Many theodicists have maintained that God is justified in permitting suffering on the ground that His doing so is a necessary condition of the realization of certain intrinsically valuable ends which the suffering serves and whose value outweighs the suffering which occasions them. Examples of ends which are frequently cited in this connection are freely chosen actions in accordance with stringent obligations to be charitable and steadfast. To say that the value of these ends outweighs the suffering which gives rise to them is to say that the existence both of these ends and of suffering is better than the non-existence of both. (Of course, the best thing of all on the view of the theodicists under discussion would be for these ends to exist and for the suffering not to exist, but they point out that it is logically impossible for there to be desirable responses to suffering in the absence of suffering.)