Here is an interesting article about perhaps why God allows evil to exist

[Massimo2002]

Why Does Evil Exist in the World?

Clinical bioethicist Charles E. Binkley responds to a recent column by Verdict columnist and Cornell law professor Sherry F. Colb regarding the existence of evil in the world. Using a theological fram...

verdict.justia.com

 

[Stevicus]

Why Does Evil Exist in the World?

Clinical bioethicist Charles E. Binkley responds to a recent column by Verdict columnist and Cornell law professor Sherry F. Colb regarding the existence of evil in the world. Using a theological fram...

verdict.justia.com

I found this point the writer of the article made interesting:

Humans experience desires, drives, and impulses, which can affect decision making, but free will itself operates independently of these urges. Free will is the agency of humans to make decisions based on conscience—which is the assimilation of intellect, emotion, and spirituality.

The writer appears to state this with absolute certainty, that free will operates independently of human urges, desires, drives, and impulses. He doesn't explain how or why. Just because he said so, I guess.

This statement would also suggest that one has to assume that spirituality exists in order for conscience to exist, which is required for free will to exist.

In discussing whether to shoot up a grocery store or buy bananas, Professor Colb describes appeal as a confounding factor of decision making, comparing it to deciding whether to drink fruit or aloe juice. While this might be a serious reflection of observed phenomena, classical moral theology would argue that it misses the essential nature of human free will. As the account goes, moral actions are rational choices between good and evil. As such, in response to the question how God can escape responsibility for God’s creatures’ choices, God is not responsible for humanity’s choices. Rather, humans as rational beings are responsible. God is responsible only for humanity’s reason and the freedom to make rational choices. Thus, when humans commit evil acts, it is because of their humanity.

Basically, the entire argument about free will is based on the premise that (1) God exists and (2) God is an all-powerful, all-knowing, benevolent entity who loves all humans. Without those premises, then all we have are the indifference of nature, biology, and cause-and-effect to explain human actions, defining them more objectively or clinically, not necessarily labeling them as "good" or "evil."

 

[Massimo2002]

I found this point the writer of the article made interesting:



The writer appears to state this with absolute certainty, that free will operates independently of human urges, desires, drives, and impulses. He doesn't explain how or why. Just because he said so, I guess.

This statement would also suggest that one has to assume that spirituality exists in order for conscience to exist, which is required for free will to exist.



Basically, the entire argument about free will is based on the premise that (1) God exists and (2) God is an all-powerful, all-knowing, benevolent entity who loves all humans. Without those premises, then all we have are the indifference of nature, biology, and cause-and-effect to explain human actions, defining them more objectively or clinically, not necessarily labeling them as "good" or "evil."

I get what the author is saying yes we mostly have free will but people will most likely choose the choice that benefits them instead of something detrimental.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I get what the author is saying yes we mostly have free will but people will most likely choose the choice that benefits them instead of something detrimental.

"Free will" is a nonsensical response to the problem of evil.

"Free will" is about choosing which of our desires we'll try to act upon. It doesn't include the ability to choose our desires. Free will can only lead to evil if we're innately inclined to evil desires.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Interesting?

<paraphrasing>

​

God creates the baby and the disease.​

What happens afterward is not His fault.​

​

God creates the rapist and the raped.​

The rapist in not His fault.​

The raped is collateral damage.​

</paraphrasing>

So let's blame human agency? Two observations:

• The "interesting article" is at best underwhelming.
• A thoughtful reading of the Book of Job is overdue.

 

[Kfox]

Why Does Evil Exist in the World?

Clinical bioethicist Charles E. Binkley responds to a recent column by Verdict columnist and Cornell law professor Sherry F. Colb regarding the existence of evil in the world. Using a theological fram...

verdict.justia.com

He said; the absence of good is evil. I don’t agree with that; the absence of good is indifference. Just because something is not good does not make it evil. There are countless things that are not good, they’re just neutral; neither good nor bad.

He also said evil is necessary to exercise free will. I can’t agree with that one either. Perhaps the option of evil might be necessary, but to suggest evil must exist in order for free will to exist; I don’t agree. Does he believe evil will be in heaven? Or does he feel there is no free will in heaven?

 

[We Never Know]

I found this point the writer of the article made interesting:



The writer appears to state this with absolute certainty, that free will operates independently of human urges, desires, drives, and impulses. He doesn't explain how or why. Just because he said so, I guess.

This statement would also suggest that one has to assume that spirituality exists in order for conscience to exist, which is required for free will to exist.



Basically, the entire argument about free will is based on the premise that (1) God exists and (2) God is an all-powerful, all-knowing, benevolent entity who loves all humans. Without those premises, then all we have are the indifference of nature, biology, and cause-and-effect to explain human actions, defining them more objectively or clinically, not necessarily labeling them as "good" or "evil."

"The writer appears to state this with absolute certainty, that free will operates independently of human urges, desires, drives, and impulses. He doesn't explain how or why. Just because he said so, I guess"

Guessing I would go with you have to choose to act upon the urges, desires, drives, and impulses.
But that's my guess/opinion.

 

[danieldemol]

Why Does Evil Exist in the World?

Clinical bioethicist Charles E. Binkley responds to a recent column by Verdict columnist and Cornell law professor Sherry F. Colb regarding the existence of evil in the world. Using a theological fram...

verdict.justia.com

Meh I dont believe anyone has demonstrated free-will exists yet.

Perhaps God is lazy and doesn't get around to fixing problems in the material realm, procrastinating on problems till the afterlife.

 

[We Never Know]

Meh I dont believe anyone has demonstrated free-will exists yet.

Perhaps God is lazy and doesn't get around to fixing problems in the material realm, procrastinating on problems till the afterlife.

In short free will is...

"the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion"

Or

"Free will is the notional capacity or ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded"

Based on that I would say I use free will everyday.

How about you?

 

[danieldemol]

In short free will is...

"the power of acting without the constraint of necessity or fate; the ability to act at one's own discretion"

Or

"Free will is the notional capacity or ability to choose between different possible courses of action unimpeded"

Based on that I would say I use free will everyday.

How about you?

Your second definition requires clarification, unimpeded by external constraints only or by internal constraints as well?

I believe no one makes choices free of internal constraints and that includes me.

 

[1213]

Why Does Evil Exist in the World?

Clinical bioethicist Charles E. Binkley responds to a recent column by Verdict columnist and Cornell law professor Sherry F. Colb regarding the existence of evil in the world. Using a theological fram...

verdict.justia.com

I think the Biblical reason for why evil exists, or is possible, is that people wanted to know evil. that is why people were expelled to this first death, that is like Matrix, where we can experience all kind of things, without our soul being destroyed by anything of this world. So, this is like a virtual test reality, where we can show what kind of people we are. And those who are righteous, can get back into the life after this.

 

[Massimo2002]

I think the Biblical reason for why evil exists, or is possible, is that people wanted to know evil. that is why people were expelled to this first death, that is like Matrix, where we can experience all kind of things, without our soul being destroyed by anything of this world. So, this is like a virtual test reality, where we can show what kind of people we are. And those who are righteous, can get back into the life after this.

Why is God testing us with this life then ?

 

[Massimo2002]

Your second definition requires clarification, unimpeded by external constraints only or by internal constraints as well?

I believe no one makes choices free of internal constraints and that includes me.

What are internal constraints ?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What are internal constraints ?

We don't desire - or even conceive of - every potential action.

There's no external, physical constraint stopping me from, say, filling my car with mashed potatoes. I would be physically capable of doing it.

The reasons my car isn't filled with mashed potatoes are:

- the idea didn't even occur to me until just now, and
- I don't really want to do it.

My car is potato-free because of my internal constraints.

 

[Massimo2002]

We don't desire - or even conceive of - every potential action.

There's no external, physical constraint stopping me from, say, filling my car with mashed potatoes. I would be physically capable of doing it.

The reasons my car isn't filled with mashed potatoes are:

- the idea didn't even occur to me until just now, and
- I don't really want to do it.

My car is potato-free because of my internal constraints.

Okay thanks I get it now so things that you could do but won't that's what internal constraints are.

 

[Stevicus]

"The writer appears to state this with absolute certainty, that free will operates independently of human urges, desires, drives, and impulses. He doesn't explain how or why. Just because he said so, I guess"

Guessing I would go with you have to choose to act upon the urges, desires, drives, and impulses.
But that's my guess/opinion.

The assumption being made is that the "head rules over the heart," so to speak. In other words, the idea is that the conscious, rational mind should be able to override whatever urges, desires, drives, and impulses our biological organism may churn up for us.

I recall a line from Star Trek, DS9, in which some interesting points about the human race are raised:

QUARK: Maybe, but I still don't want you anywhere near them. Let me tell you something about humans, nephew. They're a wonderful, friendly people as long as their bellies are full and their holosuites are working. But take away their creature comforts, deprive them of food, sleep, sonic showers, put their lives in jeopardy over an extended period of time, and those same friendly, intelligent, wonderful people will become as nasty and as violent as the most bloodthirsty Klingon. You don't believe me? Look at those faces. Look in their eyes. You know I'm right, don't you? Well? Aren't you going to say something?


The free will argument suggested by the writer of the OP article is that one simply has to make a choice to either be friendly and wonderful - or violent and bloodthirsty, while completely discounting and ignoring all other possible external factors which may influence that choice. The writer states very clearly that human choice operates independently from all of that.

If someone is tortured and beaten and forced to sign a confession he knows to be a lie, the free will position would suggest that he still knowingly committed a wrongful act and made the choice to do something wrong. It doesn't matter if he was tortured beforehand, since the assumption is that human beings should control their own actions and reactions, regardless of whatever is done to them or whatever is happening around them.

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Why Does Evil Exist in the World?

Clinical bioethicist Charles E. Binkley responds to a recent column by Verdict columnist and Cornell law professor Sherry F. Colb regarding the existence of evil in the world. Using a theological fram...

verdict.justia.com

A lot of theists believe that god created us with free will. That may be the case but if god can create any world he chooses, he certainly could have chose to create a world where everyone chooses freely good since god would know the outcomes of all worlds he could create. All arguments I have read on this issue always comes down to god created a world knowing there would be evil in it and he chose to create that world for some reason. God is responsible for evil in the world ultimately.

 

[We Never Know]

Your second definition requires clarification, unimpeded by external constraints only or by internal constraints as well?

I believe no one makes choices free of internal constraints and that includes me.

Elaborate on what you mean by 'internal constraints'

 

[metis]

There's a commentary in Judaism that has it that God make His creation "good" but not "perfect". If it were to be perfect, then we're nothing more than puppets on God's strings; but since it's only "good", then the world is ours to make better or worse.

 

[danieldemol]

What are internal constraints ?

At the surface level they are our wants.
At a deeper level I believe they are the way our brains process external stimulus and include such things as brain form, brain chemistry etc.

The way we make choices seems to me to be a product of nature and nurture.

We don't choose our nature, that is recieved at birth and during our development.

And we don't have a say in the kind of environment we are born into either (how we are nurtured).

So although I can't say it with certainty I believe our choices are largely predetermined with any non-predetermined element being the product of chance.

Since neither predetermined choices nor the product of chance are things inside our control free-will strikes me personally as an illusion.