Ryan, Jack. 1945. “The Argument of the Wager in Pascal and Others.” New
Scholasticism 19: 233–50.
Schlesinger, George. 1994. “A Central Theistic Argument.” In Jordan 1994a.
Sorensen, Roy. 1994. “Infinite Decision Theory.” In Jordan 1994a.
Wernham, James. 1987. James's Will-to-believe Doctrine: A Heretical View. Montreal:
McGill-Queen's University Press.
end p.187
8 THE PROBLEM OF EVIL
Peter van Inwagen
1. Introductory Remarks: The Problem of Evil and the Argument
from Evil
There are many ways to understand the phrase “the problem of evil.” In this chapter, I
understand this phrase as a label for a certain purely intellectual problem—as opposed to
an emotional, spiritual, pastoral, or theological problem (and as opposed to a good many
other possible categories of problem as well). The fact that there is much evil in the world
(that is to say, the fact that many bad things happen) can be the basis for an argument for
the nonexistence of God (that is, of an omnipotent and morally perfect God. But I take
these qualifications to be redundant: I take the phrases “a less than omnipotent God” and
“a God who sometimes does wrong” to be self-contradictory, like “a round square” or “a
perfectly transparent object that casts a shadow.”) Here is a simple formulation of this
argument:
If God existed, he would be all-powerful and morally perfect. An all-powerful and
morally perfect being would not allow evil to exist. But we observe evil. Hence, God
does not exist.
end p.188
Let us call this argument “the argument from evil”—glossing over the fact that there are
many arguments for the nonexistence of God that could be described as arguments from
evil. The intellectual problem I call the problem of evil can be framed as a series of
closely related questions addressed to theists: How would you respond to the argument
from evil? Why hasn't it converted you to atheism (for surely you've long known about
it)? Is your only response the response of faith—something like, “Evil is a mystery. We
must simply trust God and believe that there is some good reason for the evils of the
world”? Or can you reply to the argument? Can you explain how, in your view, the
argument can be anything less than an unanswerable demonstration of the truth of
atheism?
These questions present theists with a purely intellectual challenge. I believe this
intellectual challenge can be met. I believe it can be met by critical examination of the
argument. I believe critical examination of the argument shows that it is indeed