Philosophy 1
Feb 4, 2020
From the argument in Korma’s book “Learning from Argument,” for the non-existence of
God, the author lays down an argument that there is no God. The rationale behind his argument
is based on the proof of the encounters of evil and the suffering the world undergoes. The author
asserts, “If God is omnipotent, he can put off the suffering faced by human beings. The
argument further elucidates that when one tours the world, they get to see wondrous stunning
creations, such as beautiful mountain peaks and prairies, staggering skyscrapers, galleries, athletic talents, among others. At the same time, one can experience excess suffering and pain. Then, the question arises how such negative experiences such as extreme lack of basic
necessities of life, social,-economic inequalities, and misdemeanor, and a lot of injustice
(Korman, p. 20). All these extremes are permitted by God on account of his weakness and limitation of
power and knowledge. Therefore this cannot be the God believers would have and accept as
omnipotence, omniscient, and omnibenevolent. Hence, God does not exist. In this way, we put
into disrepute the premises of omnipotence, God is omniscient, and God is omnibenovelence. In
order for the paper to achieve its desired goal, it will approach the three-fold methodological
ways-“ 1. Lay down the claim that God is non-existence, 2. It will give my own contribution to
this problem, 3. It will visualize possible objections that other authors may find in my argument.
In this way, a more persuasive argument for the non-existence of God would be presented as
follows. AS1- The existence of suffering in the world. AS2- This is the claim that if God existed, then there would be no suffering
AS3- Therefore, AS1, contradicts AS2. Under AS1, we observe suffering in the world. This is experienced from everyday issues
of life such as hunger, poverty, conflict among others, and the magnitude of emotional pains. Claim AS2 says if there is a caring God, there would be no suffering because God is supposed to
be perfect and caring that is omniscience, Omnibenevolence, and omniscience (All-knowing, limitless in power and automatically aware of the suffering). Therefore, the reason why there is
suffering in the world is that there is no omniscient being to prevent it. That means that premises
AS3 is dependent on the argument that since there is suffering in the world (according to AS1, there is suffering in the world). Therefore there is no God because if God existed, there would
be no suffering. An objection to this conclusion/argument is the assertion by other scholars that if God did
not exist, everything would conflict with one another. For instance, the original meaning of
human existence is conflict. This was put so by the French Philosopher, J.P. Sartre. As it was
put in modern times by the English philosopher: man is a wolf and a fellowman (p. 32). In other
words, if God did not exist, everything would be permissible (Thomas Hobbes, p 212). And so
the question of the existence of God is an inevitable existential problem of the human being. Evaluation of the criticism of the argument from suffering.
The aim of this criticism is to reconcile the argument for the existence of evil in the world
with the contention that God allows the occurrence of evil. The argument to this end is as
follows. 1. This is the premise that the best world in spite, of the problem of evil, is one containing
among other elements the kinds of suffering we can endure as a human beings. 2. That being the case, the best possible world is one containing the kinds of suffering we
can endure
3. The conclusion is then that God would convenience permit the kinds of suffering we can
endure, and so the problem of evil is solved
I concur that the first premise (that there is suffering in the world) is compatible with the other
claims) that if God existed, there would be no suffering, which is in part of our human
experience. This is because there is an experience of beauty and goodness. The existence of
good and evil is allowed by God for us to appreciate creations as a whole. Korman’s arguments
are mainly negative in the evaluation of human existence. For instance, the A2 premises claims
to argue that God is responsible for our actin. In this way, he ignores the important view of
human self-causation and ethical motivation of moral autonomy. In this way, Korman would
have us bracket the whole important issue of human responsibility in action. For instance, Korman disputes the conventional view that murder should be made answerable of his
action of killing an innocent victim. The moral argument behind this excuse is that external
causes, culminating in God himself on the ultimate immovable mover/cause of everything in the
universe, would be accountable for the murderous action. The murderer is exonerated on the
grounds that he had no original intention to kill. It is the context of the ethically relevant
background leading to the miscible hand of God that led to the act of murder. In my view, the
divine intervention in the self-causation of human action is exaggerated in Korman’s account of
the moral process of ethical behavior. In conclusion, the whole argument leads us to admit that God can create a world that has
elements of evil, such as suffering and pain that are necessary for recognizing the inestimable
value of good things. Therefore, the existence of suffering is not a convincing reason to prove
God’s insistence.
Works Cited
Korma, Daniel Z. “Learning from Arguments.” An introduction to Philosophy, 2019, pp. 1-89. Sartre, Jean-Paul. Existentialism and Human Emotions. Open Road Media, 2012. Wright, George, and Thomas Hobbes. Religion, Politics and Thomas Hobbes. Taylor &
Francis, 2006.
We Write Essays for Students
Tell us about your assignment and we will find the best writer for your paper
Get Help Now!The post Phil 1000 Words Essay appeared first on EssayBishop.
Welcome to originalessaywriters.com, our friendly and experienced essay writers are available 24/7 to complete all your assignments. We offer high-quality academic essays written from scratch to guarantee top grades to all students. All our papers are 100% plagiarism-free and come with a plagiarism report, upon request
Tell Us “Write My Essay for Me” and Relax! You will get an original essay well before your submission deadline.
