Theodicy and Animals
نویسنده
چکیده
It is widely acknowledged among those philosophers and theologians who have given the matter much thought that the fact of animal suffering challenges Theism in a distinctive way. Standard attempts to reconcile human suffering with a perfectly powerful and benevolent deity don’t seem to apply easily to the case of animals. Animals can hardly be said to deserve their suffering or be morally improved by it, nor is it generally supposed that animals will be compensated for their pain in an afterlife. On the face of it, then, animal pain appears to be a bothersome evil still left over when all the theodicy work is done. I would like to consider some of the attempts to deal with animal suffering in theodicy, showing why each ultimately fails. Rather than attempting to provide the successful theodicy myself, I will try to show what the theodicies reveal about the relationship between Theism and moral attitudes toward animals.
منابع مشابه
Theodicy and End-of-Life Care
This article examines theodicy-the vindication of God's goodness and justice in the face of the existence of evil from the perspectives of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. We focus on the thought processes that chaplains, social workers, and other professionals may use in their care interventions to address issues of theodicy for patients. Theodical issues may cause anxiety and distress for be...
متن کاملAn Investigation into Luther's View of the Bondage of the Will with Implications for Soteriology and Theodicy
متن کامل
The Drama of Divine Providence: Reflections on the Problem of Evil
This article studies the problem of evil in Abrahamic religions and philosophical traditions, and tries to restate their solutions in a contemporary language. The author aims at affirming traditional Abrahamic approaches to theodicy that preserve divine omnipotence, benevolence, and omniscience, but without denying the reality of evil.
متن کاملPro Pain On the Role of the Phenomenon and Concept of Pain in Studying Animal Minds
Pain and suffering are prima facie bad things. They are widespread. So the traditional argument against theism (the argument from evil) starts with them. Defendants of God’s goodness either have to explain why there is evil (i.e. offer a theodicy) or have at least to show that the argument from evil has no force against theism. Alvin Pantinga (1985) distinguishes between offering a (positive) t...
متن کامل