I’ve posted the penultimate version of my paper “A Defense of the No Minimum Response to the Problem of Evil,” on my research page. It’s forthcoming in Religious Studies.
You can also grab it here if you’re interested.
It’s a short one, only three pages.
How can some one measure the amount of pain and suffering of another individuals misfortune. Everyone handles things in different ways and what may be a big deal to one might mean absolutely nothing to another. Even for pain from physical harm, yes its easy to tell when someones in pain and how sever it is by just looking at there facial expression. But what may be extremely painful to one may be minimally painful to painless to another. I just thought it was interesting that it said you could measure the amount of pain and suffering. I feel as though im about to get in a skeptic rant which only leads to how do you know anything exists so im gonna try to avoid that. But the problem i see with the theory of evil is how do we know the difference between evil and good without getting into personal beliefs of what is good and what is evil. To one a good deed may be an evil deed in another mans eye. And what is a bad deed might be good in another mans eye. For example a kamikaze attack from a terrorist is down right evil in the eyes of a U.S citizen But in the eyes of the terrorist this is a good deed that god wants him to do to reach whatever it is that was promised to him. What is evil for one may be good to another and what may be evil for one is good to another. How do we know who is right with out using personal opinions on how we feel about it.