Rank:Posterior Maximus I
Score: 17390
Registered:
29/08/2007
|
(Date Posted:11/08/2008 09:31:16)
Good evening, all. Every so often some well meaning but ill-informed person pops up here, and tells us all that it's "illogical" for God to exist, usually because of nothing more substantive than the fact of evil. But as generally proves to be the case, there's often little more than the fact of the word "logic" in the logic of the proposition itself! What I hope to do in this brief post is set out some principles of logic, providing demonstrations of how it works, by applying it in the shape of my own, personal theodicy. It would probably help to define some terms to begin with, and I think I'll commence with theodicy. Theodicy, simply put, is the philosophical term which describes a justifying explanation of why God permits evil, thereby responding to the problem of evil. Importantly; however, a theodicy is not the same as a defence. The former simply seeks to demonstrate how it's logical to postulate that an all-knowing, all-powerful and good God can exist in spite of the fact of evil. The latter, by contrast, seeks to refute atheistic arguments from evil without comitting to a positive claim about the divine reasons for it. But the two are often confused by a good many well-meaning Christian apologists, which often has the nett effect of providing a defence that's no more reasonable, or "logical", than is the contrary position that led to the defence! Now logic, simply put, deals with the methods of valid thinking; it reveals how to draw proper conclusions from premises. Irrespective of the form of logic under consideration, and there are many, there exists three fundamental laws to all rational thought. They are, (1) the law of non-contradiction: A is not non A; (2) the law of identity: A is A; and (3) the law of excluded middle: either A or non A. Beyond these very basic principles, there are principles of valid inference, and I'll probably touch on all of these when I refute the inevitable challenges that this post will prompt  Anyway... It's not my aim to touch on the origin of evil at this point, suffice it to say (with Thomas Aquinas), that ultimate cause rests with God. To consider this by way of propositional logic, my prefered form: (1) God is absolutely perfect; (2) God created only perfect creatures; (3) one of the perfections that God gave to some of his creatures was perfect choice; (4) some of these creatures freely chose to do evil; (5) therefore, a perfect creature caused evil. However, it's important to distinguish between the primary cause of a free action (God), and the secondary cause (a human being). Whilst God gave the power of choice, he's not responsible for the exercise of that free choice to do evil: God doesn't perform the free action for us. Also, and contrary to the position promoted by Christians having an Arminian slant, human free choice isn't a mere instrumental cause through which God necessarily works. Human beings are the efficient, albeit secondary, cause of their own free actions. God produces the fact of free choice, but each human being performs the act of free choice. Logically, then, God is responsible for the possibility of evil, but we are responsible for the actuality of it. To summarise thus far: God neither wills evil to be done, nor does he will it not to be done. He simply wills to permit evil to be done. It's probably best to briefly scope out just what is evil at this point. And I'll begin by stating what it's not: evil isn't a coeternal principle outside of God, so the issue isn't one of dualism. By using propositional logic again, I can postulate that: (1) God is the author of absolutely everything. (2) Evil is something. (3) Therefore, God is the author of evil! If we reject the first principle, we end up with dualism. If we deny the second, then we're basically admitting that we're off with the fairies! To agree that God didn't create all things is to deny his sovereignty; to say evil is nothing is to deny reality. The third possibilty is the one that follows logically from these premises. But, and the buts are always important(!), the thinking Christian should respond with the point that evil isn't a thing or a substance, it's actually a lack (or a privation if you want to speak the jargon) of a good thing that God made. Evil, put simply, is a deprivation of some particular good. Back to propositional logic: (1) God created every substance. (2) Evil isn't a substance, but is a privation in a substance. (3) Therefore, God didn't create evil! Now, and to build on from this, it's just as important to note that a privation isn't the same as a mere absence or negation. Sight is absent in a rock, just as it is in a blind person. But the absence of sight in a rock isn't a privation; by nature it shouldn't be able to see, whilst the blind person should be able to. And to suggest that evil isn't a thing, but a lack in things, isn't to suggest that it's not real. Evil is a very real lack in good things (ask a blind person!). Further, whilst evil isn't a real substance, it is a very real privation in real substances. And finally, while evil isn't an actual entity, it is a very real corruption in an actual entity. I'll conclude this post by touching on the fact of the persistence of evil; why does God allow it? Now, even if God didn't produce evil (a position that has been defended, logically, above), he apparently does permit it. But God is all-powerful and so he could destroy evil. So... why doesn't he?! Just to surprise eveyone who has made it through my post this far, I'll respond by way of ... you guessed it ... propositional logic! (1) If God is all good, then he'd destroy evil. (2) If God is all powerful then he could destroy evil. (3) But evil isn't destroyed. (4) Therefore, there isn't God! All you atheists out there are probably going, "Yeeeeaaaaahhhh!" right about now. But ... (1) God can't do what's actually impossible. (2) It's actually impossible to destroy evil without also destroying free choice. (3) But freedom of choice is necessary to a moral universe. (4) Therefore, God can't destroy evil without also destroying this moral universe. Going back to our basic laws of logic, it's impossible for God to do what's contradictory, and even an omnipotent being can only do what's possible (he can't make square circles, for instance). And it's not possible to force people to freely choose the good: forced freedom is a contradiction. Therefore, God can't literally destroy evil without also annihilating free choice. When there's no moral free choice, there's no possibility of moral good either. Unless hate is possible, love isn't possible. Finally, Christianity teaches that even though God could not destroy all evil without destroying all good, he can and will overcome all evil without destroying free choice. (1) God is all good and desires to defeat evil. (2) God is all powerful and is able to defeat evil. (3) Evil isn't yet defeated. (4) Therefore, one day it will be. The infinite and absolute power and perfection of God gurantees the eventual defeat of evil. Until then, we live with it's consequences in our lives. So there you have it, my theodicy, and a logical defence for the co-existence of evil and the Christian God! Blessings, Ian P.S. I intentionally didn't want to get drawn into discussions of the purpose of evil at this stage, but maybe I will later!
--------------------------------------------------------------
Vivos voco, mortuos plango
website: www.pleaseconsider.info email: didaktikon@gmail.com
|
