The document discusses the logical and evidential problems of evil regarding the existence of God. 1) The logical problem attempts to show that God and evil cannot logically coexist based on God's supposed attributes. The evidential problem concedes evil may be logically compatible with God but argues the extreme nature and amount of evil makes God's existence unlikely. 2) The evidential problem focuses on "apparently gratuitous evil" - suffering that seems to serve no greater purpose. Proponents argue this provides strong evidence against God's existence. 3) The evidential argument is probabilistic and inductive in nature rather than deductive. It claims the degree of evil and suffering observed in the world lowers the

1. The logical and evidential
problem of evil

2. Concept check
From what we have learned so far; you should be able to answer the following. In
pairs- check your understanding.
- What is moral evil?
- What is natural evil?
- Explain the term- theodicy.
- Name the three main strands to the Augustinian theodicy.
- Free will defence is often called a modern version of which classical theodicy?
- Describe three alternative theodicies.
- Both classical theodicies are based off which chapter in the Bible?

3. Logical vs. Evidential problem of evil
The argument from evil focuses upon the fact that the world appears to contain states
of affairs that are bad, or undesirable, or that should have been prevented by any being
that could have done so, and it asks how the existence of such states of affairs is to be
reconciled with the existence of God.
But the argument can be formulated in two very different ways.

4. Logical problem of evil
First, it can be formulated as a purely deductive argument (logical version of the
argument) that attempts to show that there are certain facts about the evil in the world
that are logically incompatible with the existence of God.
One especially ambitious form of this first sort of argument attempts to establish the
very strong claim that it is logically impossible for it to be the case both that there is
any evil at all, and that God exists.

5. Logical problem of evil
1. If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.
2. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil.
3. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists.
4. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.
5. Evil exists.
6. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn’t have the power to eliminate
all evil, or doesn’t know when evil exists, or doesn’t have the desire to eliminate all
evil.
7. Therefore, God doesn’t exist.

6. Evidential problem of evil
Alternatively, rather than being formulated as a deductive argument for the very
strong claim that it is logically impossible for both God and evil to exist, the argument
from evil can instead be formulated as an evidential (or inductive/probabilistic)
argument for the more modest claim that there are evils that actually exist in the world
that make it unlikely—or perhaps very unlikely—that God exists.
Put simply- this argument rests its case on the extreme unlikeliness that God exists in
the face of tremendous evil or suffering.

7. Evidential problem of evil
The evidential version of the problem of evil seeks to show that the existence of evil,
although logically consistent with the existence of God (ie- the existence of evil and
God can be explained) counts against or lowers the probability of the truth of theism.
These arguments are probability judgments since they rest on the claim that, even after
careful reflection, there seems to be no good reason for God’s permission of evil.
The inference from this claim to the general statement that there exists unnecessary
evil is inductive in nature and it is this inductive step that sets the evidential argument
apart from the logical argument.

8. Evidential problem of evil
The evidential argument concedes that God could have a morally sufficient reason for
allowing certain evils to occur—e.g., to ensure that some greater good is achieved as a
consequence of an evil.
Theists argue that God only allows as much evil or suffering as is absolutely necessary
in order to achieve the greater good.
But when we look at the world around us, we find prevalent instances of apparently
gratuitous evil—pointless evils from which no greater good seems to result.

9. Evidential problem of evil
According to proponents, the existence of apparently gratuitous evil provides strong
evidence that God (as traditionally defined) does not exist (e.g., William Rowe). The
suffering in the world seems more compatible with an absent God than a purposefully
inactive one. Rowe calls this the “evidential argument from evil,” because, rather than
the mere presence of evil making it impossible that God exists (i.e. the logical
argument from evil), the evidence of large amounts of evil makes it unlikely God
exists. Rowe’s version of the problem of evil proceeds as follows:
● If pointless evils exist, then God does not exist
● Pointless evils do exist
● Therefore, God does not exist

10. Essay question
November 2010
Critically evaluate the claim that the existence of evil and suffering is an argument
against the existence of a God.
Sample essay
How to write a philosophy essay
Essay writing frame