The Evil That Free Will Does: Plantinga’s Dubious Defense

Metaphysica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Maller
Keyword(s):  
Modal Logic ◽  
Free Will ◽  
Possible Worlds ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Freedom Of Will ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Possible Worlds Theory ◽  
Free Will Defense

Abstract Alvin Plantinga’s controversial free will defense (FWD) for the problem of evil is an important attempt to show with certainty that moral evils are compatible and justifiable with God’s omnipotence and omniscience. I agree with critics who argue that it is untenable and the FWD fails. This paper proposes new criticisms by analyzing Plantinga’s presuppositions and objectionable assumptions in God, Freedom and Evil. Notably, his limited concept of omnipotence, and possible worlds theory lack rigorous argument and are subjectively biased with irrelevant weak examples. My ontological possible worlds theory (Possible Conditional Timelines) shows that it is very likely that the omnipotent God exists of necessity in some worlds but perhaps not this one. Omnipotence is total and absolute, and should imply the freedom of will to actualize all worlds God chooses. Plantinga’s position regarding God’s omniscience of future counterfactuals is implausible based on modal logic conjecture.

Free Will and the Problem of Evil

1987 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Mason Myers
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Actual World ◽  
Possible Worlds ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
The Other ◽  
Human Reason ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
The World ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Traditional Theist

Hume after arguing for the compatibility of liberty and necessity, a view now known as soft determinism or compatibilism, noted that it is not ‘possible to explain distinctly, how the Deity can be the mediate cause of the actions of sin and moral turpitude’. It seems that Hume is correct if the explanation must show specifically why an omnipotent and omnibenevolent deity must permit certain actions that to human reason seem to be unnecessary evils. On the other hand if such specifity is not required, the soft determinist who also happens to be a theist can argue that it is possible that the actual world is the best of all possible worlds even though the reason for any specific apparent evil cannot be known. If seemingly evil choices are free in the soft determinist's sense but determined by an omnipotent and omniscient deity, then either that deity is not omnibenevolent or that deity has determined the world to have the maximum possible goodness through including seemingly evil choices in the scheme of things. Consequently if, as the traditional theist believes, the creator is omnibenevolent as well as omnipotent and omniscient, the occurrence of seemingly evil choices are necessary for maximizing the goodness of the whole.

Augustine on Evil

Evil ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 155-193
Author(s):  
Peter King
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Moral Evil ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Western Tradition ◽  
Full Generality ◽  
Natural Processes ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Positive Feature ◽  
To Come ◽  
Free Will Defense

Augustine’s account of evil has influenced most later thinkers in the western tradition. He argues for three central theses: (a) evil is the lack of some positive feature that ought to be present, a “privation”; (b) moral evil comes about solely from the less-than-perfect free choices of rational beings; and (c) all suffering—which need not be the result of moral evil but perhaps of natural processes or events—is morally justified. As part of his defense of (b), Augustine states in full generality the problem of evil (namely, how can there be any genuine evil in a world presided over by an omnipotent and benevolent deity?), and articulates in reply the free will defense. The arguments Augustine offers in support of the free will defense, and in favor of (a)–(c), are set forth and their implications assessed. The upshot is a coherent account of evil that dominated the debates for many centuries to come.

scholarly journals Getting off the Omnibus: Rejecting Free Will and Soul-Making Responses to the Problem of Evil

Open Theology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-42
Author(s):  
Brian C. Macallan
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Christian Tradition ◽  
John Hick ◽  
Religious Traditions ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Greater Good ◽  
The Dead ◽  
Powerful Process

AbstractThe nature of suffering and the problem of evil have been perennial issues for many of the world’s religious traditions. Each in their own way has sought to address this problem, whether driven by the all too present reality of suffering or from philosophical and religious curiosities. The Christian tradition has offered numerous and diverse responses to the problem of evil. The free-will response to the problem of evil, with its roots in Augustine, has dominated the landscape in its attempt to justify evil and suffering as a result of the greater good of having free will. John Hick offers a ‘soul-making’ response to the problem of evil as an alternative to the free will response. Neither is effective in dealing with two key issues that underpin both responses – omnipotence and omniscience. In what follows I will contrast a process theological response to the problem of evil and suffering, and how it is better placed in dealing with both omnipotence and omniscience. By refashioning God as neither all-knowing nor all-powerful, process theodicy moves beyond the dead ends of both the free will and soul-making theodicy. Indeed, a process theodicy enables us to dismount the omnibus in search of a more holistic, and realistic, alternative to dealing with the problem of evil and suffering.

scholarly journals "Sufficient to Have Stood, Though Free to Fall": Free Will in John Milton's Paradise Lost

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Martineau
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Human Nature ◽  
John Milton ◽  
Paradise Lost ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Garden Of Eden ◽  
Adam And Eve ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Book Of Genesis ◽  
The Way

In Book I of Paradise Lost, John Milton (1608-1674) asserts his intent to “justifie the wayes of God to men” (Paradise Lost1 I 26), paving the way for a revolutionary discussion of human nature, divinity, and the problem of evil, all couched in an epic retelling of Satan’s fall from grace, his temptation of Adam and Eve, and their expulsion from the Garden of Eden, as recounted in the Book of Genesis. In his treatment of the biblical account, Milton necessarily broaches a variety of subjects which were both relevant during his time and remain relevant in ours. Among these topics, and certainly one of the most compelling, is the matter of human free will.

A Defence of the Free Will Defence

1972 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 335-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen T. Davis
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
The Problem Of Evil

In this paper I shall discuss a certain theodicy, or line of argument in response to the problem of evil, viz, the so-called ‘free will defence’. What I propose to do is defend this theodicy against an objection that has been made to it in recent years.

scholarly journals The problem of evil and moral indifference

1999 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 323-345
Author(s):  
TIM MAWSON
Keyword(s):  
Free Will ◽  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
General Nature ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Moral Qualities ◽  
Moral Indifference ◽  
The Universe ◽  
Libertarian Free Will

In this paper, I argue that if the libertarian free will defence were seen to fail because determinism were seen to be true, then another solution to the problem of evil would present itself. I start by arguing that one cannot, by consideration of agents' choices between morally indifferent options, reach any conclusion as to these agents' moral qualities. If certain forms of consequentialism were false, determinism true, and if there were a God who chose to create this universe, then His choice would have been between such options. Consideration of the general nature of the universe God putatively chose to create would not then license any conclusion as His moral qualities.

scholarly journals Kritik terhadap Teologi Proses dan Pembelaan terhadap Pandangan “Greater Good” dalam Menanggapi Masalah Kejahatan

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 155-168
Author(s):  
Jessica Novia Layantara
Keyword(s):  
Problem Of Evil ◽  
Process Theology ◽  
John Calvin ◽  
Church Fathers ◽  
The Holocaust ◽  
The Reformation ◽  
The Problem Of Evil ◽  
Greater Good ◽  
Free Will Defense ◽  
The Church

Selama berabad-abad, para teolog Kristen mencoba menanggapi pergumulan filosofis mengenai masalah kejahatan. Bapa-bapa Gereja dan tokoh-tokoh reformasi di masa lalu telah mencoba menanggapi permasalahan ini dengan argumen kebaikan yang lebih tinggi (greater good). Tetapi solusi-solusi semacam itu ditolak mentah-mentah setelah peristiwa Holocaust (Auschwitz), yang merupakan peristiwa kejahatan sangat dahsyat dan mengakibatkan penderitaan banyak sekali orang. Solusi tradisional dianggap sudah tidak relevan dalam menanggapi masalah kejahatan. Teologi proses kemudian mencoba menanggapi masalah ini dengan cara mereduksi atribut-atribut Allah. Tujuan karya tulis ini adalah untuk mengkritik pandangan kontemporer khususnya teologi proses dalam menanggapi masalah kejahatan, dan juga membela pandangan greater good sebagai solusi yang masih tetap dapat dipertahankan walaupun dengan beberapa penyesuaian. Kata-kata kunci: Teodisi, Soft-determinism, Kompatibilisme, Kedaulatan Allah, Masalah Kejahatan, Holocaust, Auschwitz, Teologi Proses, Pembelaan Kehendak Bebas, Teodisi Pembentukan Jiwa, Greater Good Theodicy, John Calvin, John Feinberg   English: Throughout the ages Christian theologians have attempted to understand, from a philosophical vantagepoint, the problem of evil. The Church Fathers as well as theologians during the era of the Reformation have offered a solution that argues from the basis of the greater good. However, solutions of that nature seem to ring hollow when one considers the magnitude and scope of the Holocaust (Auschwitz). In light of that historical reality traditional solutions to the problem of evil seem inadequate. Process theology attempts to overcome the impasse by restricting the attributes of God. The purpose of this article is to critically evaluate contemporary solutions to the problem of evil, especially process theology, as inadequate solutions. Further, to argue for the traditional positional argument of the greater good as offering a tenable solution. Keywords: Theodicy, Soft-determinism, Compatibilism, Sovereignty of God, Problem of Evil, Holocaust, Auschwitz, Process Theology, Free Will Defense, Soul-shaping Theodicy, Greater Good Theodicy, John Calvin, John Feinberg

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document