![]() ![]() This seems to be analogous to the naturalistic fallacy (Moore) of deriving an ethical 'ought' from an empirical 'is' (fact). We establish causal patterns over a period of time and apply them uncritically and unscientifically in our daily explanation of events. Thinking about evil and suffering is always causal: Why did it happen? Who/what caused it? In this regard Hume indicated that the 'necessary' connection we make between cause and effect is no more than a custom (operation) of mind, and often wrong. Voltaire's Candide ridicules Lessing's idea that we have the best of all possible worlds. ![]() This article revisits the ideas of Hume and Voltaire, representing much of 18th century thought on the subject, in order to determine its relevance to present-day thinking. The question of evil, suffering and theodicy was dealt with extensively in the 18th century. Final answers to the enigma may be impossible, but we can endeavour to structure the debate and avoid increasing suffering by "wrong" ways of thinking – our theories merely exacerbate the suffering. Evil and human suffering seem to be a perennial problem. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |