The Sovereignty of Humanity and Social Responsibility for Evil Prevention
In this paper, I suggest that James Sterba’s recent restatement of the logical problem of evil overlooks a plausible theistic interpretation of the divine-human relation, which allows for a theodicy impervious to his atheological argument, which boils down to God’s failure to meet Sterba’s “Evil Pre...
| Published in: | Religions |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
MDPI
2021
|
| In: |
Religions
Year: 2021, Volume: 12, Issue: 6 |
| Further subjects: | B
James Sterba
B Dostoyevsky on evil B the sovereignty of humanity B relational conceptions of selfhood B Mirandolian theodicy B logical argument from evil |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Summary: | In this paper, I suggest that James Sterba’s recent restatement of the logical problem of evil overlooks a plausible theistic interpretation of the divine-human relation, which allows for a theodicy impervious to his atheological argument, which boils down to God’s failure to meet Sterba’s “Evil Prevention Requirements”. I argue that such requirements need not apply to God in a world under full human sovereignty, which presupposes that God never intervenes to change the natural course of events to prevent evils, as God has a decisive “greater good justification” for not intervening, namely respecting human sovereignty. This non-interventionist view of divine providence can be made tenable by the great good and dignity of the God-granted human God-like self-creativity implied by human sovereignty (a concept inspired by Giovanni Pico della Mirandola). The Mirandolian theodicy can both accommodate and complement Dostoyevsky’s Russian Orthodox view of “beneficial suffering”, predicated against the background of the conception of “collective selfhood”, overlooked by Sterba despite “featuring” on the cover of his book, no doubt due to his libertarian-individualistic assumptions about human agency and human flourishing, which a proponent of a theistic theodicy may do well to resist. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2077-1444 |
| Reference: | Kommentar in "Sixteen Contributors (2021)"
|
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Religions
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.3390/rel12060418 |