The problem of evil is for individuals who believe that there is a God who is holly, omnipotent, and nevertheless evil exist (Tooley 56).There looks to be an inconsistency between these three prepositions, in that when two of them are deemed right the third one would be wrong. On a similar note, the three are key parts of most theological positions (Mackie 201). This is because it appears like a theologian can trust one of them, but cannot contradictorily obey to all the three. Other principles indicate that good is opposed to evil, in a manner that in most cases, good things always excludes evil, and there are restrictions to what we can say omnipotent thing can do. This evidently shows that the omnipotent thing removes evil fully, and then the propositions that there is existence of evil and good things are incompatible.
There are various solutions to the problem of free will, but I will specifically focus on free will defense. It demonstrates that God allows evil because of human free will. The most significant proposed solution to the problem of evil should not be ascribed to God because they are self-governing actions of human beings, thought to have been gifted by God with the freedom of the will (Mackie 202). The free will solution further entails the earlier solution at a higher level. A good explanation as to why God gave men free will even though it would result in some significant evils; it can be argued that it is true that men can cat freely, and sometimes make an error, than acting correctly in a wholly determined manner. In this manner, freedom is considered a third order goods that are valuable than second order goods like heroism and sympathy if at all they are deterministically produced. It is further supposed that second order evils like cruelty are reasonably mandatory accompaniments of freedom; in the same way is a rationally essential pre-condition of sympathy (Mackie 201). Another problem that he finds with this solution is that of the presence of evil which is not caused by human free will.
It is true for the world to have agents with substantial freedom than for it to have only automata and we believe that much evil that happen in the world around us is as a result of abuse of freedom. In this manner, not all evil is explained. A part from man, there are also other things that inflict evil, for example, natural disasters lead to great destruction, but there is nothing that we have done and could have been done (Mackie 202).
This argument simply states that God is not accountable for evils that happen, but rather, human beings are usually faced with circumstances that require them to make a moral decision and the capability of choosing freely, but probably, they choose evil. This argument further show that God is aware that evil take place, He does not prefer evil, God has the capability of preventing evil, but evil takes place because of God’s intentions of having human beings to have free will
Problems that J. L. Mackie finds with the Freewill Solution
According to Mackie, there are various objections to free will as a solution to the problem of evil. Firstly, he questions the assumption that second order evils are rationally essential accompaniments of freedom. He argues that if God created in a manner that their free choices they sometimes prefer what is evil and other times what is good. He further argues that if there is a sound impossibility for a man to choose the good. On one or various occurrences, there cannot be a sound impossibility for man to freely choose good on each occurrence (Phillips 58). This therefore implies that God did not have a choice in making human beings who can act freely and inflict evil and those that are innocent automata. Mackie argues that in this manner God failed to present himself of this possibility by not being consistent with his being both wholly, good and omnipotent.
Yes, there can be possible solutions that to the problems that Marcie raises. It could be better to argue that it is good for the world to have beings with important freedom than that it only has automata. Evil can be considered as a tool of God to correct, inculcate, and purify. God is justified in allowing suffering in terms of promoting the development of evil. Seemingly, his main goal was to bring to appoint maturity and spiritual well-being. Plantiga further argues that Mackie is wrong to assume that God and evil are compatible. He argued that even though God is omnipotent, he could not create a world where nobody chooses evil. Furthermore, there is a likelihood of having an omnibenevolent God who would create a globe that has evil. It is true that evil that prevails around us is because of abuse of our freedom.
Mackie, John Leslie. “Evil and Omnipotence.” Mind 64.254. (1955), pp. 200-212.
Phillips, D. Z. The Problem of Evil &the Problem of God. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005. Print.
Tooley, Michael. “The Problem of Evil”. Plato.stanford.edu. N.p., 2002. Web. 25 May 2016.