1. Introduction to Philosophy Jason M. Chang
Bruce Russell,
“The Problem of Evil”
Introduction to Philosophy Jason M. Chang

2. Lecture Outline The argument from gratuitous evil
The theist’s response
Russell’s argument
100 year old earth believer
Split the article into parts

3. Argument from Gratuitous Evil

4. Argument from Gratuitous Evil
Story of Ariana Swinson
Story of Roe’s fawn
Story of Ariana Swinson
On September 6, 2000, Edward Swinson and Linda Paling pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and first degree child abuse involving their daughter, two-year-old Ariana. Jack Kresnak, a writer for the Detroit Free Press, wrote the following on September 26, 2000:
St. Claire County Assistant Prosecutor Jean Sturtridge asked for long prison terms based on Ariana’s many bruises, broken right elbow, 4-inch skull fracture, brain hemorrhaging, ears that showed signs of tearing and sharp blows to the girl's mouth that tore the small piece of skin that holds the upper lip to the gum.
On January 31, 2000, the couple killed Ariana after throwing her to the floor for not eating properly and “then pouring water into the mouth of the unconscious child, causing her to drown.” Ariana was malnourished, dehydrated, and had lost more than half her blood on the day of her death. The parents waited nearly an hour after Ariana's death to call police, using the time to coach their other two young children to take the fall for Ariana's death.
Story of Roe’s fawn
By philosopher William Roe
Story
“In some distant forest lightning strikes a dead tree, resulting in a forest fire. In the fire a fawn is trapped, horribly burned, and lies in terrible agony for several days before death relieves its suffering”

5. Argument from Gratuitous Evil
What is gratuitous evil?
Definition
Contrasted with necessary evil

6. Argument from Gratuitous Evil
Necessary evil
Gratuitous evil
Amount of evil
Good achieved 50 1
100 2
200 3
300 4
400 5
500
Amount of evil
Good achieved 6
500 7 8 9 10
100

7. Argument from Gratuitous Evil
(P1) An omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient God could and would prevent the occurrence of gratuitous evil.
(P2) Gratuitous evil exists.
Therefore, (C) There is no omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient God.

8. The theist’s response

9. The theist’s response Response by theist
Strong vs. weak epistemic position
The theist’s response
“We are in no position to judge…”
Cat analogy

10. Are we justified in believing that gratuitous evil exists?

11. Russell’s argument

12. Russell’s argument Russell’s thesis
We are justified in believing that gratuitous evil (i.e., evil that does not lead to a greater good) exists
Russell’s thesis  We are in a strong epistemic position to believe (i.e., justified in believing) that gratuitous evil exists

13. Russell’s argument Russell’s starting point General observation
We do not always see a greater good come out of evil events

14. Russell’s argument Two questions
Does not seeing something (i.e., a greater good) justify us in believing that it is not there?
When are we justified in believing that something (i.e., a greater good) is not there?

15. Russell’s argument Why?
Are we justified in saying that these are not in this room?
Why?

16. Russell’s argument
Nobody would argue that we are NOT justified because…
The elephant could be invisible
The tooth fairy could be too tiny
The matrix could be hidden from us by supercomputers

17. Russell’s argument
We are justified in believing there is no elephant, fairy, matrix because…
(1) We do not see it
(2) It not being there is the simplest explanation for why we do not see it

18. Russell’s argument Do not see an elephant Do not see a tooth fairy
Explanation 1
(Simpler)
Explanation 2
(Complicated)
Do not see an elephant
There is no elephant
The elephant is invisible
The tooth fairy’s magic makes her too small to see
Do not see a tooth fairy
There is no tooth fairy
Do not see the matrix
The matrix is hidden from us by supercomputers
There is no matrix

19. Russell’s argument Russell’s proposal
We are justified in believing something is not there when…
(1) We do not see it
(2) It not being there is the simplest explanation for why we
do not see it
What is the simplest explanation for why we do not see a greater good produced from some evils?

20. Russell’s argument Do not see an elephant Do not see a tooth fairy
Explanation 1
(Simpler)
Explanation 2
(Complicated)
Do not see an elephant
There is no elephant
The elephant is invisible
The tooth fairy’s magic makes her too small to see
Do not see a tooth fairy
There is no tooth fairy
The matrix is hidden from us by supercomputers
Do not see the matrix
There is no matrix
The greater good is hidden from us by an invisible Being
Do not see a greater good from some evils
There is no greater good

21. Justified to think that gratuitous evil exists
Russell’s argument
Russell’s conclusion
We are justified in believing a greater good is not produced from some evils (Ariana, fawn, holocaust, throat cancer...?) because:
(1) We do not see it
(2) It not being there is the simplest explanation for why we
do not see it
Justified to think that gratuitous evil exists

22. Russell’s argument
(P1) An omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient God could and would prevent the occurrence evil that does not produce a greater good.
(P2) We are justified in believing that some evil in the world does not produce a greater good
Therefore, (C) We are justified in believing that there is no omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient God
Notes about argument:
Argument is about what we are justified in believing (not what there actually is)

23. 100 year old earth believer

24. Objections and replies
Imagine a person who believes the earth is only 100 years old.
He believes that signs of age, fossils, old books were placed by God to deceive us and that there are reasons beyond our understanding for God’s deception.
According to this person, we are “too ignorant to judge” that the earth is over 100 years old.
100 year earth believer
Believes the earth is 100 years old
Believes signs of age, fossils, old books were placed by God to deceive us
Believes there are reasons for God’s deception that are beyond our understanding
Believes we are too ignorant to judge that the earth is over 100 years old
Consensus on 100 year earth believer
We are NOT too ignorant to judge whether the earth is over 100 years old
Absurd to suggest that we are too ignorant to judge
Both theists and atheists would agree that we CAN judge whether the earth is over 100 years old.

25. Objections and replies
Plenty of evidence that:
Earth is over 100 year old
There is no greater good produced from some evils
Theist rejects the “too ignorant to judge” reply
Double standard
Theist uses the “too ignorant to judge” reply
Theist’s double standard
Plenty of evidence that:
Earth is over 100 years old
There is no greater good that comes out of some evil
Double standard
Theist rejects the “too ignorant to judge” reply when (1)
Theist insists upon the “too ignorant to judge” reply when (2)