On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se...
Stephen Law is a philosopher and author. Currently Director of Philosophy and Cert HE at Oxford University Department of Continuing Education. Stephen has also published many popular books including The Philosophy Gym, The Complete Philosophy Files, and Believing Bullshit. For school talks/ media: stephenlaw4schools.blogspot.co.uk Email: think-AT-royalinstitutephilosophy.org
Comments
That sucks. Can't find this on iTunes - if anyone is aware of how it can be accessed ex juris, please let me know.
Appreciated your comment on philosophy embracing all religions Steve. (The Big Questions) As I see it religions and science are merely flawed tools. Devised to assist survival of us, in compliance with the meaning of life. The meaning of life is life itself, ensuring the continuity of the species. Since nothing entirely dependant or wholly reliant on human existence, can occur in our absence. While we have existed without them. They cannot exist without us. If we did indeed teach our youngsters how to question, they would soon expose all the paradoxes (incomplete understandings of reality) currently holding us back. Regards, al.
Stephen, I'm interested to know whether you have read Chris Hedges' I Don't Believe in Atheists (Free Press, 2008). If you have, I would be interested in your take on Hedges' attack on (what he suggests is) the myth that modern societies are progressing morally. If you haven't read it, I think you would enjoy it - the title is deceptive. Although Hedges has a Masters in Divinity, he excoriates religious fundamentalists. Here's a snippet:
"We live in a universe indifferent to our fate. We are seduced by myths that assure us that the world revolves around us, that fate or the gods or destiny have given us a unique and singular role in the cosmos. It is hard to reject these myths and face the bleakness of human existence. It is more comforting and reassuring to have faith in our collective moral advancement as a species, to believe that we are heading toward something great and wondrous. The bitter reality of existence and the bondage of human nature, however, are real. These myths are not. All those who tempt us to play God turn us away from the real world to flirt with our own annihilation". (pp. 89-90).