Information to Users
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
INFORMATION TO USERS This manuscript ,has been reproduced from the microfilm master. UMI :films the text directly from the original or copy submitted. Thus, some thesis and dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from any type of computer printer. The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleedthrough, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reProduction. In the unlikely. event that the author did not send UMI a complete mannscript and there are missing pages, these wiII be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are reproduced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and contimJjng from left to right inequal sections with small overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at the back ofthe book. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. Higher quality 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI Po Bell & Howell Information Company 300 North Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor. MI4S106·1346 USA 3131761-4700 800:521-0600 TOWARDS A CONTEMPORARY THEODICY: BASED ON CRITICAL REVIEW OF JOHN HICK, DAVID GRIFFIN AND SRI AUROBINDO A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE DIVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN PHILOSOPHY DECEMBER 1995 By Michael McDonald Dissertation Committee: Eliot Deutsch, Chairperson Roger T. Ames Graham Parkes David Chappell Joan Chatfield UMI Number: 9615536 UMI Microfonn 9615536 Copyright 1996, by UMI Company. All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. UMI 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, MI 48103 ill © Copyright 1995 by Michael McDonald IV Dedicated to my wife, Anne Selten, who has proven countless times that the power oflove can indeed heal even those who have been most gravely andpersonally afflicted by the problem ofevil. v ABSTRACT The author seeks to make the fewest changes that would allow Christianity to withstand the challenges of the problem of evil (POE). The project includes a critical review ofthe theodicies ofJohn Hick and David Griffin, and also draws upon the thought ofSri Aurobindo. From Augustinian thought, the author retains the emphasis upon moral evil. He argues that any theodicy resolving moral evil also resolves natural evil, and that natural evil, as such, would not create major barriers to religious faith. The author accepts John Hick's ideas of epistemic distance and soul making, with supplementation. But he rejects Hick's use ofthe Greater Good Defense, instead positing that evil cannot be justified. The only question is whether it can be healed. David Griffin's strategy of adjusting divine traits to solve the POE is rejected. Instead, the author modifies Christian ideas ofhuman identity and human destiny. Griffin's definition of evil is also rejected. Instead, the author defines evil as "a horrendous violation of an important human value." The author posits that Aurobindo correctly identified the Christian doctrine of"one lifetime only" as posing major problems for theodicy. The Indian view ofmultiple lifetimes helps to resolve dysteleological evil. Karma does not solve the POE all by itself, the author holds, but a revised notion of VI karma as "a law of appropriate experience" can make an essential contribution. The Indian view ofhuman identity in terms ofSelfand ego personality is also adopted, again with some modification. The author uses an analogy of evil with a wound to argue that all evil can be healed, and must be healed in the process ofpsycho-spiritual growth. The conclusion is that evil may be ultimate to the ego personality, but is not ultimate to the soul, as such. From the perspective of the Soul or Self, suffering can be self-chosen for important and positive reasons. In short, a total picture ofhuman identity and destiny gained by borrowing and revising Indian doctrines enables the author to suggest a new format for the interpretation ofevil. Vll TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract v Abbreviations x Preface ,0. Chapter 1: John Hick's Theodicy 1 Critical Challenges to Hick's View 8 The Flew-Mackie Challenge 11 Dysteleological Evil 20 The Greater Good Argument 32 Soul-Making 42 Animal Pain and Natural Evil 50 Universalism 60 Freedom 66 Felix Culpa 70 Evil and Creation 75 Conclusion 82 Chapter 2: David Griffin's Process Theodicy 85 A Christian Theology? 97 Divine Self-Limitation and Overall Value 105 God's Power 111 Vlll Angelic Intervention 119 Creativity and Coercive Power 127 The Battle of Good and Evil 135 Conclusion 139 Chapter 3: Genuine Evil 143 Intrinsic Elements in Evil 148 Philosophical Debate 152 The Greater Good Defense 160 A Definition ofEvil 163 The Locus ofEvil is Personal 172 How Evil is Carried into the Future 176 Traditional Views of Redemption 184 Healing From Evil 195 Conclusion 208 Chapter 4: Aurobindo and the Indian View ofthe Soul 211 Sri Aurobindo 216 Aurobindo's Overall Philosophy 226 Aurobindo's Approach to Evil 238 The Soul and the Ego Personality 251 Immortality 264 Karma and R,ebirth 275 IX Plato . 284 Conclusion 289 Chapter 5: Tough Questions 291 Question 1: Continuity with Christianity 291 Question 2: Creatio Ex Nihilo and Reincarnation 293 Question 3: Is Reincarnation Dualistic? 297 Question 4: Dysteleological Evil and Dostoevski .., 301 Question 5: God, Suffeling and Realization 309 Question 6: Optimism 314 Question 7: Is Avoiding Pain the Highest Value? 316 Question 8: Fate and Free Will 318 Question 9: The Practical Upshot 321 Question 10: Specific Practical Recommendations 323 Question 11: Could There Be Life Without Evil? 326 Question 12: The Self and the Ego Personality 332 Question 13: Giving Comfort at Times of Grief 333 Question 14: Karma and the Radical Origin ofEvil 337 Question 15: Ego Personality as a Victim 340 Question 16: Is Rebirth the Real Death? 343 Appendix: Thematic Summary 346 Bibliography 353 x ABBREVIATIONS ECG Madden, Edward H. and Hare, Peter H., Evil and the Concept ofGod, Charles C. Thomas Publisher, Springfield illinois, 1968. EE Davis, Stephen T (Ed.), Encountering Evil, John Knox Press, Atlanta, 1981. EGL Hick, John, Evil and the God ofLove, Harper Collins, San Francisco, 1966. ER Griffin, David Ray, Evil Revisited, State University ofNew York Press, New York, 1991. GPE Griffin, David Ray, God, Power and Evil: A Process Theodicy, University Press ofAmerica, 1991. JHT Mesle, C. Robert, John Hick's Theodicy: A Process Humanist Critique, St. Martin's Press, New York, 1991 LD Aurobindo, Sri, The Life Divine, Sri Aurobindo Ashram Press, Pondicherry, India, fifth edition, 1970. POE Problem ofEvil PT Nash, Ronald, Process Theology, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1987. WW Bruteau, Beatrice, Worthy is the World: the Hindu Philosophy ofSri Aurobindo, Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, Cranbury, New Jersey, 1971. Xl PREFACE The traditional question oftheodicy in the West is a simple one: How can evil exist in a world that has been created by an omniscient, omnipotent God, whose primary quality is love? However, the answer to this question depends very much upon the answers given to a number ofunderlying questions -- questions concerning God's qualities, the character of radical creation, the nature ofhuman identity, human destiny, the afterlife, and, perhaps most importantly -- the nature ofevil itself. In the chapters to follow, we will see how the answers to these questions within traditional Augustinian theology do indeed result in an overall world-view that fails to reconcile evil with a God oflove. Many Augustinian doctrines such as the final Judgment, hell, the problem of imposed characteristics, and the problem of unequal origins, make evil permanent, absolute, and insoluable. In the first two chapters, I will review the two main rivals to traditional theodicy which have emerged over the last few decades, John Hick's "soul-making" theodicy, and David Griffin's process theodicy. Having located the great contributions -- and also the difficulties -- in these well-known theodicies, I will proceed to outline a religious world-view Xll that tries to preserve the contributions and avoid the problems. While I don't think it is possible to "solve" the problem ofevil (POE), as ifit were some sort ofmath equation, I do think it is possible to construct a world-view which is far more resistant to the main critical arguments of the POE than are the views presented by Hick and Griffin. The first move in constructing such a world-view comes in chapter three, where I define the word "evil." Operative definitions are always central to any philosophical analysis, but as many critics have noted, definition plays a special role relative to the POE. I 'will argue that the definition ofevil used by Hick and Griffin is inappropriately utilitarian, since it suggests that evil is like a quantity which can added and subtracted. By this utilitarian definition, evil is seen solely in terms ofobjective events, and thus, evil must be automatically perpetuated into the future, where it can continue to ruin all further values and consummations forever. By contrast, my own definition will posit evil as representing a horrific betrayal ofan important human value. Thus, I will argue that the locus of evil is personal, and that evil always has an unavoidable connection with human subjectivity. This subjective element is important, for it raises the possibility that evil can be healed. By my view, evil emerges as a psycho spiritual event, one that occurs within a format ofinterpretation and is thus part ofan ongoingplay ofvalues.