Free Will Defense Research Paper

1602 Words7 Pages
The Problem of Evil, first raised by the Greek philosopher Epicurus, is the atheological argument based on the existence of evil. The Free Will Defense attempts to justify that an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent God can coexist with evil. The Free Will Defense does not answer either the inductive problem of evil or J. L. Mackie’s deductive problem of evil, as there are problems with the Free Will Defense. Moreover, I believe that it is vital to define what good and evil are in the discussion for the problem of evil. The Free Will Defense reasons that it is necessary for God to give us free will and free will necessarily contains the possibility of evil. Evil happens out of the exercise of free will by human beings, consequently there are no contradictions between God’s qualities and the existence of evil. Some theists believe that free will is essential as it is one of the greatest good. Subsequently, it is better for God to make a world with free will in it then one without, even with the knowledge that evil may arise from the exercise of free will. This could be used to defend God's inactions despite…show more content…
The inductive problem of evil follows these premises according to Michael Tooley: evils, such as people suffering from diseases, exist in our world. An omnipotent and omniscient being would know when these events will occur and also has the power to stop them from happening. Evils have “wrongmaking qualities” (Tooley). An action is wrong if their “wrongmaking characteristic that is not counterbalanced by any rightmaking characteristics” (Tooley). If the omnipotent and omniscient being permits these evils to exist, then this means the being is not morally good. This means there would not be a being that is omnipotent, omnibenevolent - or morally good - and omniscient. God, by definition, is an omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent being. Therefore, God does not
Open Document