Essays in Philosophy of Religion (Jostarhaye Falsafeh Din)

The Privation Theory of Evil; Challenges and Responses

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Fatemeh Rafati 1
Mohammad Sa’idi Mehr 2

1 PhD student of Islamic Philosophy and Theology, Faculty of Law, Theology and Political Science, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, Tarbiat Modares University

http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/rs.2019.4371
Abstract
The Privation Theory of Evil (PT) is a general theory about the nature of evil according to which all kinds of evil have a privative (or negative) nature. During the Middle Ages some great philosopher-theologians such as Augustine and Aquinas endorsed (PT). After being neglected for a long time, recently philosophers of religion have shown interest (PT). In this paper, after a brief review of Augustine’s and Aquinas’ views, we first provide a comprehensive sketch of (PT). Then we examine some of the arguments proposed in favour of (PT) and show that they are not conclusive. Then we discuss two counterexamples proposed by the opponents of (PT), namely pain and moral evil. First, we investigate and critique the views of the two sides and then we argue that the main deficiency of the current debate is the philosophers of religion don’t utilities the relevant theories of philosophy of mind and ethics to illustrate their philosophical grounds. Without clarification of these grounds any well-based judgment about (PT) seems to be impossible.

Keywords

The Privation Theory of Evil
Pain
Moral Evil
Augustine
Aquinas
پلنتینگا، الوین. (1384). خدا، اختیار و شر، ترجمه و توضیح محمد سعیدی مهر، قم: طه.
ملاصدرا، (1981 م.) الحکمه المتعالیه فی الاسفار العقلیه الاربعه، ج ۷، بیروت: دار احیاء التراث.
 
Ahern, M. B. (1966). ‘The Nature of Evil’, Sophia, 5.
Anglin, Bill and Stewart Goetz (1982). ‘Evil Is Privation’, International Journal of Philosophy of Religion, 13.
Aquinas, Thomas (1947). Summa Theologica, Translated by Fathers of the English Dominican Province, New York: Benziger Bros.
Aquinas, Thomas (1975). Summa Contra Gentiles, Translated by Anton C. Pegis et al., London, University of Notre Dame Press.
Aquinas, Thomas (2003). On Evil, Translated by Richard Regan, edited with an Introduction and Notes by Brian Davies, New York, Oxford University Press.
Augustine (1953). ‘The Nature of The Good’, in Augustine: Earlier Writings, edited and translated by John H. S. Burleigh, Kentucky, The Westminster Press.
Augustine (1961). The Enchiridion on Faith, Hope and Love, Edited by Henry Paolucci, Chicago, Henri Regenery Company.
Augustine (2010). On the Free Choice of the Will, On Grace and Free Choice, and Other Writings, Edited and Translated by Peter King, New York, Cambridge University Press.
Aydede, Murrat (ed.) (2005). Pain; New Essays on Its Nature and The Methodology of its Study, Cambridge, MIT press.
Calder, Todd C., (2007). ‘Is the Privation Theory of Evil Dead?’, American Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 44, No. 4.
Dennett, Daniel C. (1978). ‘Why You Can't Make a Computer that Feels Pain’, Synthese, 38, 3.
Hick, John (1966). Evil and the God of Love, London: Macmillan.
Hvidt, Niels Christian (2007). ‘The Historical Development of the Problem of Evil’, in Physics and Cosmology. Scientific Perspectives on the Problem of Natural Evil, Nancey Murphy, Robert John Russell, William R. Sto, Berk, Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences.
Kane, G. Stanley (1980). ‘Evil and Privation’, International Journal of Philosophy of Religion, 11.
Reichenbach, Bruce R. (1982). Evil and a Good God, New York, Fordham University Press.
Shrader-Perry, William Joshua (2018). ‘Reclaiming Privation Theory for the Contemporary World’, LMU/LLS Theses and Dissertations, 516.

Home

Guide for Authors

Submit Manuscript

Reviewers

Contact Us