Philosophy · Year 12 · Metaphysics of God · Summer Term

The Problem of Evil

Investigate the most significant challenge to the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, and supremely good God: the existence of evil and suffering in the world.

TL;DR:This topic tackles the single greatest challenge to belief in a loving, all-powerful God: why is there so much suffering in the world?

• National Curriculum Attainment Targets
• AQA A-Level Philosophy: Section 4.1 - Metaphysics of God - The problem of evil

About This Topic

The Problem of Evil is a cornerstone of the Philosophy of Religion component within A-Level specifications, such as those from AQA, OCR, and Edexcel. It presents what is arguably the most formidable challenge to traditional theism. This topic requires students to move beyond simplistic assertions and engage in rigorous philosophical analysis, distinguishing between the logical problem, which argues that God and evil are logically incompatible, and the evidential problem, which contends that the sheer amount and nature of evil make God's existence improbable. The study centres on classic formulations, particularly J.L. Mackie's 'inconsistent triad', which posits that the propositions 'God is omnipotent', 'God is wholly good', and 'Evil exists' cannot all be simultaneously true.

Students will explore two major theistic responses. The first is the Free Will Defence, most famously associated with Alvin Plantinga, which argues that moral evil is a necessary consequence of granting humans free will, a state of affairs that is of greater value than a world of determined, non-moral beings. The second is the Soul-Making Theodicy, developed by Irenaeus and modernised by John Hick, which views evil and suffering as necessary challenges that allow humans to develop their character and achieve spiritual maturity. This topic provides an excellent platform for developing critical evaluation skills, as students must weigh the strengths and weaknesses of these complex arguments and form their own reasoned conclusions.

Key Questions

1. Explain the distinction between the logical and evidential forms of the problem of evil.
2. Analyse the 'inconsistent triad' as formulated by J.L. Mackie.
3. Evaluate the success of either the free will defence or soul-making theodicies in responding to the problem of evil.

Learning Objectives

• Distinguish clearly between the logical and evidential forms of the problem of evil.
• Articulate J.L. Mackie's formulation of the inconsistent triad and its logical implications.
• Analyse the core arguments of the Augustinian and Irenaean types of theodicy.
• Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the Free Will Defence as a response to moral evil.
• Critically assess the success of John Hick's Soul-Making Theodicy in response to both moral and natural evil.

Key Vocabulary

Theodicy	A philosophical and theological attempt to reconcile the existence of a benevolent, omnipotent God with the existence of evil and suffering in the world.
Inconsistent Triad	The set of three propositions (God is omnipotent, God is omnibenevolent, Evil exists) that J.L. Mackie claimed are logically inconsistent with each other.
Moral Evil	Suffering and wrongdoing that results from the free choices of sentient beings, such as murder, theft, or cruelty.
Natural Evil	Suffering that results from natural processes and events, not from the choices of free agents, such as earthquakes, diseases, or famines.
Omnibenevolence	The attribute of being perfectly or supremely good.
Free Will Defence	The argument that God permits moral evil as a necessary consequence of creating beings with genuine free will, which is a greater good.

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

Common Misconception

The Problem of Evil definitively proves that God does not exist.

What to Teach Instead

It is a philosophical problem, not a scientific proof. The logical form argues that God's existence is logically impossible given evil, while the evidential form argues it is highly improbable. Theistic responses aim to show why these arguments are not conclusive.

Common Misconception

A theodicy is supposed to explain exactly why a specific tragedy, like a particular earthquake, happened.

What to Teach Instead

Theodicies are general philosophical frameworks attempting to justify why a good God would permit evil and suffering in general. They do not claim to provide specific reasons for individual instances of suffering.

Common Misconception

The Free Will Defence successfully explains all types of evil.

What to Teach Instead

The Free Will Defence is primarily aimed at explaining moral evil, which results from the actions of free agents. It faces significant challenges in explaining natural evil, such as diseases and natural disasters, which do not appear to be caused by human choices.

Active Learning Ideas

Philosophical Chairs

Theodicy Courtroom Trial

Divide the class into legal teams. One team prosecutes God on the grounds of the existence of evil, using Mackie's arguments. The other teams act as the defence, one using the Free Will Defence and the other the Soul-Making Theodicy. A jury group evaluates the arguments and delivers a verdict on which case was more persuasive.

50 min·Small Groups

Philosophical Chairs

Moral vs. Natural Evil Case Studies

In pairs, students analyse a series of short case studies describing different instances of suffering (e.g., a tsunami, a historical act of cruelty, a genetic disease). They must categorise each as moral or natural evil and then explain which theodicy, if any, could best account for it.

30 min·Pairs

Philosophical Chairs

Inconsistent Triad Logic Puzzle

Present students with Mackie's inconsistent triad. Their task is to create a visual diagram or flowchart showing how different philosophers (e.g., Mackie, Plantinga, Hick) attempt to resolve the logical contradiction by modifying or rejecting one of the initial propositions.

25 min·Individual

Assessment Ideas

Quick Check

Students write a single paragraph explaining which of the two main problems of evil (logical or evidential) they find more challenging for theism, and why. This checks their understanding of the core distinction.

Peer Assessment

A timed essay responding to a question such as, 'To what extent is the Soul-Making theodicy a successful response to the problem of evil?'. This assesses their knowledge, analysis, and evaluative skills.

Quick Check

Students use a 'confidence grid' to rate their ability to define key terms, explain Mackie's argument, and critique two major theodicies, identifying areas for revision.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between a 'theodicy' and a 'defence'?

A 'theodicy' (like Hick's) attempts to provide a plausible justification for why God allows evil, essentially trying to explain God's reasoning. A 'defence' (like Plantinga's) is more modest; it aims only to show that the existence of God and the existence of evil are not logically incompatible, without claiming to know God's actual reasons.

Why is J.L. Mackie's formulation called the 'inconsistent triad'?

It is called a triad because it consists of three propositions. It is 'inconsistent' because Mackie argues that if you accept any two of the propositions (God is omnipotent; God is wholly good; Evil exists), you must logically reject the third. They cannot all be true at the same time.

Can someone believe in God and still find the Problem of Evil a serious challenge?

Yes, absolutely. Many theologians and religious philosophers consider the Problem of Evil to be the most serious and emotionally powerful objection to their faith. Grappling with this problem is often seen as a central part of sophisticated theological and philosophical reflection.