THE PROBLEM OF EVIL: EXAMINATION # 2

 

PART ONE: ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTION:

 

Present Plato’s argument that no one does wrong knowingly, including a diagram of the argument.  This conclusion appears to contradict our intuitive belief that people (including ourselves) do in fact knowingly commit wrongs and deserve blame/punishment for it.  Which of these is correct: our intuitive belief or Plato’s conclusion?  If our intuitions are incorrect, how could we be so mistaken?  If you think Plato's argument is incorrect, where exactly does it go wrong?  Finally, what implications if any would Plato’s claim have for the way we blame and punish wrongdoers?

 

PART TWO: ANSWER ONE OF THE FOLLOWING THREE QUESTIONS

1) Explain the Autonomous Natural Order argument and how it provides an explanation for the existence of natural evil; include a diagram of the argument. Indicate how it differs from the Instrumentalist conception of evil (that all evil leads to greater good); show how each of these might explain a tsunami that kills many people.  Evaluate both the Instrumentalist and the ANO explanation for the existence of natural evil.

 

2) Compare and assess the Dualist and Strong Holist (you may also discuss weak Holism if you like, but it is not required) answers to the Problem of Evil.  How do each of these attempt to explain the existence of evil in the world?  What are the strengths and weaknesses of each approach?  Indicate whether you find either of them convincing.

 

3) Provide an interpretation of the Prodigal Son parable (Luke 15:11-32) in light of the Fortunate Fall idea.  Evaluate the Fortunate Fall idea as an account of the reason for evil in the world.  Is the Prodigal Son a version of the Fortunate Fall idea?  Make sure to provide an interpretation of the role both of the younger and older son in the parable.