Editing Problem of evil (section)

{{Short description|Reconciling the existence of evil with a God}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=July 2019}}
{{Philosophy of religion sidebar |expanded=Challenges}}
{{Theodicy}}

The '''problem of evil''' is the philosophical question of how to reconcile the existence of [[evil]] and [[suffering]] with an [[Omnipotence|omnipotent]], [[Omnibenevolence|omnibenevolent]], and [[Omniscience|omniscient]] [[God]].<ref name="Tuling 2020">{{cite book |author-last=Tuling |author-first=Kari H. |year=2020 |chapter=Part 1: Is God the Creator and Source of All Being – Including Evil? |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=EzfsDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA3 |editor-last=Tuling |editor-first=Kari H. |title=Thinking about God: Jewish Views |location=[[Lincoln, Nebraska|Lincoln]] and [[Philadelphia]] |publisher=[[University of Nebraska Press]]/[[Jewish Publication Society]] |series=JPS Essential Judaism Series |pages=3–64 |doi=10.2307/j.ctv13796z1.5 |isbn=978-0-8276-1848-0 |s2cid=241611417 |lccn=2019042781}}</ref><ref name="Stanford">The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "[https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/evil The Problem of Evil]", Michael Tooley</ref><ref name="IepEvidential">The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, "[https://www.iep.utm.edu/e/evil-evi.htm The Evidential Problem of Evil]", Nick Trakakis</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Calian |first=Florin George |date=2024-07-18 |title=Editorial RES 1/2024: Religion and the Problem of Evil (I) Religion und das Problem des Bösen (I) |url=https://sciendo.com/article/10.2478/ress-2024-0001 |journal=Review of Ecumenical Studies |language=en |volume=16 |issue=1 |pages=5–7 |doi=10.2478/ress-2024-0001|url-access=subscription }}</ref> There are currently differing definitions of these concepts. The best known presentation of the problem is attributed to the Greek philosopher [[Epicurean paradox|Epicurus]].

Besides the [[philosophy of religion]], the problem of evil is also important to the fields of [[theology]] and [[ethics]]. There are also many discussions of evil and associated problems in other philosophical fields, such as [[secular ethics]]<ref>Nicholas J. Rengger, ''Moral Evil and International Relations'', in ''[[SAIS Review]]'' 25:1, Winter/Spring 2005, pp. 3–16</ref><ref>Peter Kivy, ''Melville's Billy and the Secular Problem of Evil: the Worm in the Bud'', in ''[[The Monist]]'' (1980), 63</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Kekes |first=John |author-link=John Kekes |title=Facing Evil |publisher=Princeton UP |year=1990 |location=Princeton |url=https://archive.org/details/facingevil0000keke |isbn=978-0-691-07370-5 }}</ref> and [[evolutionary ethics]].<ref>Timothy Anders, ''The Evolution of Evil'' (2000)</ref><ref>{{cite book|first1=Lawrence C. |last1=Becker |first2=Charlotte B. |last2=Becker |title= Encyclopedia of Ethics|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=KfeOAQAAQBAJ |year=2013|publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-135-35096-3|pages=147–149}}</ref> But as usually understood, the problem of evil is posed in a [[theological]] context.<ref name="Stanford" /><ref name="IepEvidential" />

[[Religious responses to the problem of evil|Responses to the problem of evil]] have traditionally been in three types: refutations, defenses, and [[Theodicy|theodicies]].

The problem of evil is generally formulated in two forms: the '''logical problem of evil''' and the '''evidential problem of evil'''. The logical form of the argument tries to show a logical impossibility in the coexistence of a god and evil,<ref name="Stanford" /><ref name="IepLogical"/> while the evidential form tries to show that given the evil in the world, it is improbable that there is an omnipotent, omniscient, and a wholly good god.<ref name="IepEvidential" /> Concerning the evidential problem, many [[Theodicy|theodicies]] have been proposed. One accepted theodicy is to appeal to the strong account of the compensation theodicy. This view holds that the primary benefit of evils, in addition to their compensation in the afterlife, can reject the evidential problem of evil.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Mousavirad |first=Seyyed Jaaber |date=2022-07-02 |title=Theory of Compensation and Problem of Evil; a New Defense |url=https://www.philosophy-of-religion.eu/index.php/ejpr/article/view/3357 |journal=European Journal for Philosophy of Religion |volume=14 |issue=2 |doi=10.24204/ejpr.2022.3357 |issn=1689-8311}}</ref>  The problem of evil has been extended to non-human life forms, to include suffering of non-human animal species from [[natural evil]]s and human [[animal cruelty|cruelty]] against them.<ref name=inwagenp120/>

According to scholars,{{efn| Attributed to multiple sources:<ref name="2009Meister"/><ref name="auto">Howard-Snyder, Daniel; O'Leary-Hawthorne, John (1998). "Transworld Sanctity and Plantinga's Free Will Defense". International Journal for Philosophy of Religion. 44 (1): 1–21. {{doi|10.1023/A:1003210017171}}. {{ISSN|1572-8684}}.</ref><ref name="auto1">Alston, William P. (1991). "The Inductive Argument from Evil and the Human Cognitive Condition". Philosophical Perspectives. 5: 29–67. {{doi|10.2307/2214090}}. {{ISSN|1758-2245}}. {{JSTOR|2214090}}. {{S2CID|16744068}}.</ref> }} most philosophers see the logical problem of evil as having been rebutted by various defenses.<ref name="2009Meister">{{cite book |last1=Meister |first1=Chad |title=Introducing Philosophy of Religion |date=2009 |publisher=Taylor & Francis |isbn=9781134141791 |page=134}}</ref><ref name="auto"/><ref name="auto1"/>

{{TOC limit|3}}