Welcome to AS 8: God, Atheism, and the Problem of Evil
Welcome to your study notes for AS 8: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion (CCEA Religious Studies 4610, Paper Code: SRE81). The question of why evil and suffering exist in a world supposedly created by an all-powerful, all-loving God is one of the most famous debates in human history. Whether you find philosophy natural or a bit daunting, do not worry! We will break down every key concept, philosopher, and exam skill step-by-step.
Exam Snapshot: Your AS 8 exam lasts 1 hour and 20 minutes. You will answer two 25-mark questions (one from Section A and one from Section B). Each question is split into two assessment objectives:
• AO1 (12 marks): Demonstrating clear knowledge and understanding of philosophical arguments, terms, and texts.
• AO2 (13 marks): Analysing and evaluating these arguments while engaging with broader human experience.
1. Core Definitions: Setting the Stage
Before diving into the arguments, let us get the basic terminology clear.
The Three Positions on God's Existence
• Theism: Belief in a personal, transcendent (above and beyond the physical universe), and immanent (active within the world) God who creates and sustains everything.
• Atheism: The rejection of belief in the existence of God or deities.
• Agnosticism: The view that the existence of God or the supernatural is unknown or unknowable, leading to a suspension of judgment.
The Classical Divine Attributes of God
Classical theism describes God using three key attributes (often called the 'Omni' attributes):
1. Omnipotence: God is all-powerful and able to do anything that is logically possible.
2. Omnibenevolence: God is all-loving, supremely good, and desires the absolute best for creation.
3. Omniscience: God is all-knowing, possessing complete knowledge of past, present, and future events.
Memory Trick (The 3 'Omnis'):
• Potence = Power (Omnipotent = All-powerful)
• Benevolence = Benefit/Love (Omnibenevolent = All-loving)
• Science = Knowledge (Omniscient = All-knowing)
Classifications of Evil: Moral vs. Natural
Philosophers divide suffering into two distinct categories. Keeping them separate in your exam answers is essential:
• Moral Evil: Suffering, harm, and cruelty that result directly from intentional human choices, actions, or failures to act (omissions).
Examples: Warfare, murder, theft, torture, and systemic injustice.
• Natural (Non-Moral) Evil: Suffering that arises from physical and natural processes in the world, completely independent of human intention or agency.
Examples: Earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanic eruptions, famines caused by drought, and genetic or degenerative diseases.
Examiner Warning: Never mix these two up! Do not explain an earthquake as human moral failure unless you are specifically linking it to human negligence (like poorly built housing). Natural evil operates through the laws of nature independently of human free will.
Key Takeaway: Theism asserts that an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, and omniscient God created the universe, yet the world contains massive amounts of both moral and natural evil.
2. The Logical Problem of Evil (Deductive / A Priori)
The Logical Problem of Evil is a deductive (a priori) argument. This means it tries to prove that belief in God is logically self-contradictory. If the premises are true, the conclusion must follow as a matter of pure logic.
Epicurus and David Hume: The Ancient Dilemma
The ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus formulated the classic dilemma, which the Scottish Enlightenment philosopher David Hume famously quoted in his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion:
"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then is he impotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then is he malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Whence then is evil?"
Hume famously described the problem of evil as the undeniable "rock of atheism" on which theistic belief breaks apart.
J.L. Mackie and the Inconsistent Triad (1955)
In his seminal paper Evil and Omnipotence (1955), the philosopher J.L. Mackie clarified the logical problem using the concept of the Inconsistent Triad.
Picture a triangle with three propositions at its points:
1. God is Omnipotent (all-powerful).
2. God is Omnibenevolent (all-loving).
3. Evil exists.
Mackie's argument works through strict logical deduction:
• If God is all-loving, He would want to eliminate evil completely.
• If God is all-powerful, He has the power and capability to eliminate evil.
• Yet, evil indisputably exists in our world.
• Therefore, any two of these propositions can be held together, but holding all three simultaneously is logically contradictory. If any two are true, the third must be false.
Mackie's Conclusion: The traditional theistic God cannot logically exist. Theism is built on an irrational, self-contradictory foundation.
Key Takeaway: The logical problem (deductive) argues that God's power, God's love, and the existence of evil cannot logically co-exist at the same time.
3. The Evidential Problem of Evil (Inductive / A Posteriori)
While the logical problem looks at theoretical contradiction, the Evidential Problem of Evil is an inductive (a posteriori) argument based on real-world observation and evidence.
The Argument from Scale and Gratuitous Suffering
The evidential problem does not just argue that evil exists; it points to the overwhelming scale, intensity, and apparently gratuitous (pointless) nature of suffering in the world (sometimes called dysteleological evil).
Even if a believer argues that some suffering builds character or is the price of human free will, why is there so much suffering that serves no obvious good purpose at all? Consider:
• An animal dying a slow, agonizing death in a remote forest fire with no humans around to learn from it.
• Infants and innocent young children suffering from painful terminal illnesses.
The evidential argument concludes that while God's existence might not be logically impossible, the vast amount of pointless suffering makes the existence of an all-powerful, all-loving God improbable and unjustified.
Fyodor Dostoyevsky and Ivan Karamazov
A powerful literary and philosophical expression of the evidential problem comes from Russian author Fyodor Dostoyevsky in his classic novel The Brothers Karamazov.
In the chapter "Rebellion", the character Ivan Karamazov presents his devout brother Alyosha with horrific, real-life accounts of the brutal torture and suffering of innocent children.
Ivan's Core Philosophical Challenge:
• Children are entirely innocent; they have not sinned or exercised their free will to cause harm.
• Ivan refuses to accept any future divine plan, eternal harmony, or cosmic compensation that requires the unmerited suffering of an innocent child as its price.
• He states that if the entry ticket to ultimate heavenly harmony costs the agonizing tears of even one brutalized child, he chooses to respectfully "return his ticket" to God.
Ivan does not necessarily deny that God exists; rather, he argues that a God who permits such unmerited, innocent suffering is morally unworthy of worship and acceptance.
Key Takeaway: The evidential problem looks at the overwhelming quantity and pointless cruelty of suffering (especially among innocents), concluding that God's existence is highly improbable or morally unacceptable.
4. The Problem of Evil for Atheists
Crucial Exam Insight: Many students assume the problem of evil is exclusively a dilemma for religious believers. However, CCEA examiners frequently look for students who recognize that evil also poses profound philosophical and existential challenges for naturalistic atheists!
1. The Grounding Problem: What Makes Evil 'Evil'?
• If there is no transcendent God or ultimate moral standard outside the physical universe, morality is often viewed as a product of human evolution, social convention, or personal preference.
• In a purely materialist universe without objective moral facts, how can an atheist classify an action as genuinely, objectively evil rather than merely socially disadvantageous or personally distasteful?
2. The Existential Problem: Meaningless Suffering
• For the theist, suffering—however difficult to understand—might ultimately be resolved, redeemed, or compensated by God in an afterlife.
• For the naturalistic atheist, suffering is completely arbitrary, blind, and devoid of ultimate purpose. There is no cosmic justice, no ultimate vindication for victims of injustice, and no redemption for the innocent lives cut short by tragedy.
Key Takeaway: While evil challenges the theist's concept of God, it challenges the atheist to explain how objective evil exists without a moral lawgiver and leaves humanity in an indifferent universe with no ultimate justice.
5. Comparing the Two Problems of Evil
Keep these two distinct approaches clear in your essays:
The Logical Problem:
• Type of Argument: Deductive / A Priori (based on logic and definitions).
• Key Question: Can an all-powerful, all-loving God and evil logically co-exist at the same time?
• Key Thinkers: Epicurus, David Hume, J.L. Mackie (Inconsistent Triad).
• Target: Proving theism is logically contradictory and impossible.
The Evidential Problem:
• Type of Argument: Inductive / A Posteriori (based on empirical evidence and observation).
• Key Question: Given the scale, intensity, and pointlessness of suffering, is God's existence reasonable?
• Key Thinkers: Fyodor Dostoyevsky (Ivan Karamazov in The Brothers Karamazov).
• Target: Showing theism is highly improbable and unconvincing.
6. Exam Strategy & Engaging with Human Experience (AO2)
To achieve top-band marks in AO2 evaluation questions (13 marks), CCEA mark schemes require you to engage with other aspects of human experience. This means connecting philosophical theories to historical and contemporary real-world events.
Concrete Examples to Use in Your AO2 Arguments
• Historical Injustice and Genocides (Moral Evil): The Holocaust, the Rwandan Genocide, or state-sponsored persecution show human cruelty at an overwhelming scale, challenging whether God could justify non-intervention.
• Global Natural Catastrophes (Natural Evil): Events such as the 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, major earthquakes, or global pandemics highlight intense, indiscriminate suffering completely unlinked to human moral choice.
• Personal Bereavement and Childhood Illness: Childhood terminal illnesses (such as pediatric cancers) provide direct modern parallels to Ivan Karamazov's challenge regarding the unmerited suffering of the innocent.
Summary Checklist for Top Marks
1. Clearly distinguish between Moral and Natural evil.
2. State the difference between Logical (Mackie/Hume) and Evidential (Dostoyevsky) arguments.
3. Quote and explain the Inconsistent Triad and Epicurus' dilemma accurately.
4. Address the problem of evil for atheists (the grounding of morality and the absence of cosmic justice).
5. Embed real-world human experience into your evaluative judgments!