Call us now:
1-888-318-0063

Calculate price of your paper below

Fill out the information below to calculate your price:
Type of paper ^[1-9]\d*$
Academic Level ^[1-9]\d*$
Deadline ^[1-9]\d*$
Number of pages ^[1-9]\d*$
Word count 0
Total price for this order:
$0
Proceed to Order

B.C. Johnsons `God and the Problem of Evil`

[YOUR NAME] [YOUR PROFESSOR 'S NAME] [CLASS NUMBER] [DATE OF ASSIGNMENT] [YOUR NAME] [YOUR PROFESSOR 'S NAME] [CLASS NUMBER] [DATE OF ASSIGNMENT] God and The Common Good Approach :Allowing Evil to Demonstrate Empathy When one looks at the atrocities in the world today and the example used by Johnson of the innocent infant burned in a building , a common reaction is empathy and sympathy . If Johnson insists on viewing God as a mortal and asserting that a human being would not allow such atrocity ,then it is useful to look at approaches taken by ethical , moral actors in the world today . Looking at the Common-Good approach , we may assert that in order for us to have qualities , such as empathy , compassion , and other redeemable traits , we must have situations in our lives that evoke these qualities . Without pain and suffering , there is no need for these positive traits , therefore , the argument that God is not good does not apply . His position is to ensure that men can become good of their own free will . Johnson would argue this approach equates to allowing men to become evil on their own free will , as well . But , this is the essence of free will and of the Common-Good approach , we must be able to see both good and evil to decide how to best achieve a society that can combat this inevitability of free will . Therefore , God can be looked at as human , then human approaches to ethics and the common good must be utilized , so under the Common Good approach , God is good .The Common Good approach essentially deals with an idea that individual good is equated and ensured with public good and that individual ,honorable traits should be shared as a community in a healthy fashion .In this way , goodness , is not good if it is not shared . To apply this to counteract Johnson ‘s argument , it can be said , then , that in order to recognize good to share it , we must also be able to recognize bad or ““evil , in order to know how to counter it in a world of free will . ““Appeals to the common good urge us to view ourselves as members of the same community , reflecting on broad questions concerning the kind of society we want to become and how we are to achieve that society (Velasquez , et al , 1996 , 2 .Johnson ‘s argument to this would be that just as there is an imagined God that promotes good in the actions of man in reference to free will ,there could easily be an evil God that does the opposite . ““For example , we could say that God is evil and that he allows free will so that we can freely do evil things , which would make us more truly evil than we would be if forced to perform evil acts (Johnson , 1983 , 88 . This argument against free will does not compliment Johnson ‘s insistence that we look at God as a human being . Just as societies…

Share the joy
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  

Tags: , , , , , , , ,



Samples by Category
100% Plagiarism FREE
We accept
Our benefits
100% plagiarism-free papers
Prices starting at $10/page
Writers are native English speakers
100% satisfaction guarantee
Free revisions according to our Revision Policy
Free title and reference pages
Attractive discount policy
Contact us
Toll-free for US customers: 1-888-318-0063
Toll-free for UK customers: 44-203-519-7740
Toll-free for Australian customers: 61-283-550-180
Chat now Сall us on Skype
Request information by e-mail:
Click here fer send mail to us