Theory of Compensation and the Problem of Evil; a New Defense

Authors

  • Seyyed Jaaber Mousavirad Allameh Tabataba'i University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.2022.3357

Abstract

 All previous solutions to the problem of evil have attempted to resolve the issue by showing that God permits them in order for a greater good. However, some contest that there are some instances in which there is no greater good, while in other cases good and evil have been distributed unjustly. I intend, in this paper, to show that if God compensates the harms of evil in the afterlife, any sort of good is enough to resolve the problem of evil; even if the good is not greater than the evil nor distributed appropriately. To attain this end, I have divided the theory of compensation into a weak and a more effective account. The weak account alleges that the goodness of evils is merely based upon their compensation in the afterlife. I have proposed, in this article, a new, strong account of this theory, which considers both primary goods of evils and afterlife compensation as combined elements that can justify evils. After distinguishing the weak and strong versions of compensation, the idea is explained, and the advantages of the theory are pointed out. Finally, there are two chief objections raised against the validity of this theory, both have been mentioned and answered in this paper.

References

Adams, M. M. (2012). Horrendous Evils and the Goodness of God. In M. R. Louis P. Pojman (Ed.), Philosophy of Religion an Anthology Boston Wadsworth

al-Halabi, A. l.-S. (1984). Taqrib al-ma'aref Qom: al-Hadi.

Al-Hilli, A. (1382AH). Kashf al-Morad. Qom: Mo’assese Nashr Islami.

al-Hilli, M. (1414 A.H). Al-Maslak fi Usul al-Din. Mashhad Majma’ Al-Bohouth Al-Eslamiahy.

al-Kulaynī, M. i. Y. q. (1987). Al-Kāfī (Vol. 2). Tehran Dar al-Kutub al-Islamiyah

Al-Mufid, A.-S. (1993). Awail al-Maqalat. Qom: al-M0'tamar al-Alami lelshaykh Al-Mufid.

al-Murtaza, S. (1387 A.H). Jamal-al Ilmi Wal Amal. Najaf: Al-Adab.

al-Saduq, A.-S. (1993). Man la Yahduruh al-Faqih (Vol. 2). Qom: Daftar Entesharat Eslam.

Aquinas, T. (2016). Commentry on the Book of Job (B. Mulladay, Trans.). United States: Aquinas Institute.

Hick, J. (2017). Soul-Making Theodicy. In M. L. Peterson (Ed.), The Problem of Evil (pp. 262-273). Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvpj7gm2.19

Jantzen, G. M. (1984). Do We Need Immortality? Modern theology, 1(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0025.1984.tb00003.x

Mackie, J. L. (1982). The Miracle of Theism. Oxford Clarendom press.

Maitzen, S. (2009). Ordinary Morality Implies Atheism European Journal for Philosophy of Religion(2), 107-126. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.v1i2.343

Majlesi, M.-B. (1983). (Vol. 64). Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath al-Arabi.

Michael Peterson, W. H., Bruce Reichenbach, David Basinger. (1991). Reason & Religious Belief. New York: Oxford.

Plantinga, A. (2012). The Free Will Defense. In M. R. LOUIS P. POJMAN (Ed.), Philosophy of Religion, An Anthology. USA: Clark Baxter.

Rowe, W. (2004). Evil Is Evidence against Theistic Belief. In M. L. P. a. R. J. VanArragon (Ed.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Religion. USA: Blackwell.

Stump, E. (1996). Aquinas on the Sufferings of Job. In Howard-Snyder (Ed.), Evidential Argument from Evil: Indiana University Press.

Swinburne, R. (2017). Natural Evils and Moral Choice. In M. L. PETERSON (Ed.), The Problem of Evil. Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press.

Published

2022-07-02

How to Cite

Mousavirad, Seyyed Jaaber. 2022. “Theory of Compensation and the Problem of Evil; A New Defense”. European Journal for Philosophy of Religion 14 (2). https://doi.org/10.24204/ejpr.2022.3357.