Now that TIA has eviscerated the Euthyphro Dilemma once and for all, RL suggests that we have a look at dissecting Epicurus as well:
I’d love to hear your thoughts on this:
The following was written by the Greek Philosopher Epicurus:
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?Apparently Epicurus is trying to do a complete covering, using all four possibilities of the tautology, i.e.
a = will and b == power and c == eradicate evil and d == good
a + NOT b –> NOT b (nothing about d)
b + NOT a –> NOT d (assumes b)
a + b –> c, but NOT c in the world implies either a or b or both are wrong
NOT a + NOT b –> NOT d and (NOT a and NOT b)I believe that Epicurus was trying to argue this way:
1. We see evil, but apparently God is not omnipotent enough to stop it
2. But if some object and say that God is omnipotent and can stop evil, then we rejoin and say, “okay , then God must be malevolent, because He won’t stop it then.”
3. if some object to that and say “well, God is able and willing to stop evil” then we say “well, then why is there all this evil in the world” ( why is God failing to act?) or is God is not able to stop evil nor willing to stop evil, then why even call Him (a good) God?
I think he was attempting to attack Chrisitianity (Jewry) with this argument that I’ve given above in a logic format, but here’s where I see the mistakes:
Not c does NOT imply NOT d, rather NOT c –> e (permission) e –> f (free will)
ie.
1. there is evil, but God is NOT stopping it.
2. this not stopping evil does NOT arise from lack of power but permission
3. does permitting evil mean that God is evil?or does it rather mean that God has given us free will to do evil and that’s the real crux. I think the problem is in the subtle assertion that not c –> not d, i.e. evil implies not a good God, that the evil in the world is God’s fault, when it really is due to us, 100 percent.
To me, the entire argument has always been based on a category error, as based on the Biblical evidence, what God calls evil and what Man calls evil are only of superficial and occasional synchronicity. But I’ll take a closer look at the logic later, in the meantime, feel free to take a crack at it if you like.