The quick answer is no, free will does not solve the problem of evil. I actually heard this argument last semester when Katrina Myers wrote a response to my article on the fallacy of religion. I was unable to give a full response to this theodicy and so I will do my best to destroy the argument and to render it an argument fit only for the irrational.
A little bit of background first. The problem of evil is something that has been around since ancient times. I think the ancient philosopher Epicurus summed it best when he wrote, “Is God willing to prevent evil but unable? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both willing and able? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither willing nor able? Then why call him God?” So the problem of evil is quite simply, how is it that evil exists in a world created by an omnipotent, omnibenevolent, omniscient God? It seems that either he is not all-powerful or he just doesn’t give a crap.
There are four moves, which try to get around the problem: 1) You can bite the bullet and say that God isn’t all-powerful. 2) You can bite the bullet and say that God isn’t omnibenevolent. 3) You can argue that evil existing is not inconsistent with an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God. Or 4) you can argue that evil does not exist.
Bad things happen to good people and so people are always left with the problem of evil. Some people have taken on the third strategy and tried to argue that evil existing is not inconsistent with an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God. Enter the free will argument. A lot of people have heard of this argument in one way or another. The argument goes something like this: If God exists, he would want to maximize the goodness in the world and minimize evil. Denying someone free will seems like a huge evil and certainly free will seems like a good thing. All of the evils in the world are caused by humans having free will. Although there are a lot of evil things that occur in this world, it would have been a greater evil for God to deny all humans free will. Therefore, God and evil can coexist.
There are a few problems with this argument. The most glaring problem is that it doesn’t seem like all of the evils in the world are caused by humans having free will. Tsunamis, plagues, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, disease and a whole host of natural events seem like terrible things. Some people say that you can’t control those events so they aren’t evil. But this argument doesn’t hold up because God was presupposed to be all-powerful and can control these natural events, including preventing them. Why couldn’t he have created an Earth where earthquakes do not occur, where floods do not wipe out thousands of people, where viruses aren’t allowed to adapt? What’s stopping this omnipotent God?
Even in the realm of free will of human events, it doesn’t seem like the argument holds up. Why couldn’t an omnipotent omnibenevolent God intervene to prevent events like torture, rape and genocide? This omnipotent God could have just made Hitler a slightly better artist and thus preventing the whole Holocaust from happening. There is no supposition that God has a non-intervention policy. So is he willing to prevent evil but not able? Then he isn’t omnipotent and thus contradicts our first assumption.
The point is that free will really doesn’t solve anything and doesn’t seem to show that God and evil are compatible. It’s a nice quick answer to a child in Sunday school who might not be aware of all of the misfortunes across the world. There are some people who take the latter strategy and say that there is no evil in the world. This is similar to the “God has a plan” which expresses such apathy towards the suffering of millions in the world, perpetuated by an uncritical mind and a privileged existence.
This is a terrible line of thinking. It creates a worldview where any sort of suffering and evil is tolerable. For instance, two of my past friends were raped. One of them was raped, became pregnant and had a miscarriage, while the other was raped by her church pastor for four years. Because they believe in an omnipotent omnibenevolent God that watches over them, they came to the same conclusion- that they were supposed to be raped. God had it in his plan that these two people were going to be raped and that everything was according to plan. I sincerely hope you find something morally wrong with this.
Ken Ueda is a senior math, physics and philosophy triple major. He can be reached for comment at [email protected].
