Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-br6xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-11T19:18:30.626Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Divine intentions and the problem of evil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 September 2018

JUSTIN MOONEY
JUSTIN MOONEY*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Amherst MA, 01003, USA
*
e-mail: jmooney@umass.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I develop a model of providence on which God brings about good states of affairs by means of evil states of affairs, but without intending the latter. The model's key ingredient is a backward-looking counterpart of the distinction between intended and merely foreseen consequences of an action: namely, a distinction between intended and merely foreseen means to an end. The model enables greater-good theodicies to avoid worries about whether a perfect being could intend evil.

Information

Type
Articles from the 2018 Postgraduate Essay Prize
Information
Religious Studies , Volume 55 , Issue 2 , June 2019 , pp. 215 - 234
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Almeida, M. (2008) The Metaphysics of Perfect Beings (New York NY: Routledge).Google Scholar
Byerly, T. R. (2014) The Mechanics of Divine Foreknowledge and Providence (New York NY: Bloomsbury Publishing Inc.).Google Scholar
Chisholm, R. (1969) ‘The defeat of good and evil’, Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 42, 2–38.Google Scholar
Citron, G. (2015) ‘Dreams, nightmares, and a defence against arguments from evil’, Faith and Philosophy, 32, 247–270.Google Scholar
Craig, W. L. (2009) ‘Divine sovereignty and quantum indeterminism’, Question of the Week #138, at Reasonable Faith, <https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/question-answer/divine-sovereignty-and-quantum-indeterminism/>..>Google Scholar
Dawes, G. (2009) Theism and Explanation (New York NY: Routledge).Google Scholar
Dougherty, T. (2014) The Problem of Animal Pain: A Theodicy for All Creatures Great and Small (London: Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
Dougherty, T. & Pruss, A. (2014) ‘Evil and the problem of anomaly’, in Kvanvig, J. (ed.) Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion, V (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 49–87.Google Scholar
Dowe, P. (2011) ‘Darwin, God, and chance’, in Kvanvig, J. (ed.) Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion, III (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 55–66.Google Scholar
Flint, T. P. (1998) Divine Providence: The Molinist Account (Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar
Graves, S. (2014) ‘God and moral perfection’, in Kvanvig, J. (ed.) Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion, V (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 122–146.Google Scholar
Hasker, W. (2011) ‘An open theist theodicy of natural evil’, in Perszyk, K. (ed.) Molinism: The Contemporary Debate (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 281–302.Google Scholar
Helm, P. (1994) The Providence of God (Downers Grove IL: InterVarsity Press).Google Scholar
Hick, J. (2010) Evil and the God of Love (Palgrave Macmillan).Google Scholar
Hunt, D. (1993) ‘Divine providence and simple foreknowledge’, Faith and Philosophy, 10, 394–414.Google Scholar
Hudson, H. (2005) The Metaphysics of Hyperspace (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Kvanvig, J. L. (2011) Destiny and Deliberation (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Markosian, N. (1999) ‘A compatibilist version of the theory of agent causation’, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 80, 257–277.Google Scholar
Markosian, N. (2012) ‘Agent causation as the solution to all the compatibilist's problems’, Philosophical Studies, 157, 383–398.Google Scholar
Mawson, T. J. (2011) Free Will: A Guide for the Perplexed (New York NY: Continuum).Google Scholar
McCann, H. J. (2009) ‘Pointless suffering? How to make the problem of evil sufficiently serious’, in Kvanvig, J. (ed.) Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion, II (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 161–184.Google Scholar
McCann, H. J. (2012) Creation and the Sovereignty of God (Indianapolis IN: Indiana University Press).Google Scholar
McIntyre, A. (2014) ‘Doctrine of double effect’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Zalta, Edward N. (ed.), <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2014/entries/double-effect/>..>Google Scholar
McNaughton, D. (1995) ‘The problem of evil: a deontological perspective’, in Padgett, A & Swinburne, R. (eds) Reason and the Christian Religion: Essays in Honor of Richard Swinburne (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 329–351.Google Scholar
McNaughton, D. (2002) ‘Is God (almost) a consequentialist? Swinburne's moral theory’, Religious Studies, 38, 265–281.Google Scholar
Murphy, M. (2017) God's Own Ethics: Norms of Divine Agency and the Argument from Evil (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
O'Connor, T. (2012) Theism and Ultimate Explanation: The Necessary Shape of Contingency (Malden MA: Wiley-Blackwell).Google Scholar
Pearce, K. (2017) ‘Foundational grounding and the argument from contingency’, in Kvanvig, J. (ed.) Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion, VIII (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 245–268.Google Scholar
Peels, R. (2016) ‘Can God repent?’, in Kvanvig, J. (ed.) Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion, VII (Oxford: Oxford University Press.), 190–212.Google Scholar
Pike, N. (2001), ‘Hume on evil’, in Rowe, W. (ed.) God and the Problem of Evil (Malden MA: Wiley-Blackwell), 57–73.Google Scholar
Plantinga, A. (1974) The Nature of Necessity (Oxford: Clarendon Press).Google Scholar
Plantinga, A. (2004) ‘Supralapsarianism, or “O Felix Culpa”’, in van Inwagen, P. (ed.) Christian Faith and the Problem of Evil (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans), 1–25.Google Scholar
Plantinga, A. (2016) ‘Law, cause, and occasionalism’, in Bergmann, M. & Brower, J. (eds) Reason and Faith: Themes from Richard Swinburne (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 126–144.Google Scholar
Pruss, A. R. (2011) Actuality, Possibility, and Worlds (New York NY: Continuum).Google Scholar
Reitan, E. (2014) ‘A deontological theodicy: Swinburne's lapse and the problem of moral evil’, Faith and Philosophy, 31, 181–203.Google Scholar
Stump, E. (2010) Wandering in Darkness: Narrative and the Problem of Suffering (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Swinburne, R. (1993) The Coherence of Theism: Revised Edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Swinburne, R. (1998) Providence and the Problem of Evil (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Timpe, K. (2014) Free Will in Philosophical Theology (New York NY: Bloomsbury).Google Scholar
Todd, P. (2011) ‘Geachianism’, in Kvanvig, J. (ed.) Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion, III (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 222–251.Google Scholar
van Inwagen, P. (1988) ‘The place of chance in a world sustained by God’, in Morris, T. V. (ed.) Divine and Human Action: Essays in the Metaphysics of Theism (Ithaca: Cornell University Press), 211–235.Google Scholar
van Inwagen, P. (2006) The Problem of Evil (Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
Zimmerman, D. (2012) ‘The providential usefulness of simple foreknowledge’, in Clark, K. J. & Rea, M. (eds) Reason, Metaphysics, and Mind (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 174–196.Google Scholar
Zimmerman, D. (2016) ‘Defining omnipotence’, in Bergmann, M. & Brower, J. (eds) Faith and Reason: Themes from Richard Swinburne (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 84–125.Google Scholar