Theodicy on Trial

Philosophia - Moral anti-theodicists have posed a consequentialist argument against the theodical enterprise: that theodicies lead to harmful consequences in reality and that this should be...     

The Problem of Theodicy and Religious Response to Cancer

The authors studied the religious response to cancer in a group of hematology/ oncology-clinic patients. Method: Patients (N = 45) were surveyed with a self-report questionnaire. Five items were designed to reflect the five major categories of theodicy or modes of reconciling suffering with a morally good God. Results: Of the 45 patients, in response to their illness, 67% (N = 30) increased amount of prayer, 51% (N = 23) gained faith, and 16% (N = 7) increased the frequency of church attendance. The majority of patients across all levels of religious belief endorse a theodicy that claims God has a reason for their suffering, but this reason cannot be explained or understood. Conclusions: Religious cancer patients intensify their religious belief and practice in response to their illness. Despite the elusiveness of an explanation for their suffering in religious terms, patients remain confident in their faith.     

上帝与恶的悖论——斯温伯恩神正论述评

面对上帝与恶的悖论,斯温伯恩积极回应,用逻辑有效性重释上帝的本质,用自由意志为道德的恶辩护,用有用性为自然的恶辩护。但上帝与恶的悖论本来就无法化解,斯温伯恩的努力最终归于失败。     

Evolution, Theodicy and Value

In the first section I present a disagreement between a number of scholars (including T.H. Huxley, G.J. Romanes, George C. Williams and Holmes Rolston) concerning the goodness, indifference, evil or even wickedness both of nature and of nonhuman creatures. Section 2 examines and rejects the response to these diverse judgements that values are generated by human valuers employing different perspectives. In Section 3, the thesis that nonhuman animals are commonly either wicked or immoral is considered. The next two sections address the value or disvalue of predation and parasitism, and then of waste, selfishness and suffering. In the Section 6 I conclude that the evolutionary system of nature has vast overall value, and that although there are widespread evils within it, the only significant alternatives are a lifeless world, a world without sentient life, and a world of constant supernatural intervention, all probably worlds without such a positive balance of value as the actual world.     

Austin on knowing

Philosophical anthropology is a broad‐gauged study of man drawing on the findings of empirical sciences and the humanities. The paper is intended as a tribute to one of the pioneers in this field. The first part outlines central features of Plessner's conception, focusing on man's instinctual deficiency and his ‘eccentric position’ in the world; man from this perspective is an ‘embodied’ creature in the dual sense of experiencing the world through his bodily organs and of ‘having’ a body and being able to reflect on his mundane situation. In social terms the perspective implies that man can find himself only through embodiment in institutional settings and role patterns ‐ settings which, however, remain open to reinterpretation and revision. Subsequently Plessner's outlook is compared and contrasted with alternative views of the human condition. According to Gehlen, man's instinctual deficiency an openness need to be corrected through institutional stability and the standardization of role structures. Reviewing leading writings of the ‘counter‐culture’, a final section explores contemporary anti‐institutional trends which see man as a fugitive from social constraints and his search for self‐fulfilment as antithetical to role patterns.     

Against Theodicy: A Response to Peter Forrest

In responding to Peter Forrest’s defence of ‘tough-minded theodicy’, I point to some problematic features of theodicies of this sort, in particular their commitment to an anthropomorphic conception of God which tends to assimilate the Creator to the creaturely and so diminishes the otherness and mystery of God. This remains the case, I argue, even granted Forrest’s view that God may have a very different kind of morality from the one we mortals are subject to.     

The Theological Philosophy of William Temple: A Desire Argument and a Compassionate Theodicy

Philosophia - In this paper, I will investigate the early work of William Temple (1881–1944). My contention is that Temple’s systematic philosophy contains resources for an interesting...