Theodicy, Theodicy

Cahn in his essay entitled "Cacodaemony" in which, through the weakness of the concept of cacodaemony, the weakness of theodicy is underlined.

An evil thing can only be referred to as a negative form of a good thing, such as dis cord, in justice, and loss of life or of liberty. These are all defined in terms of a spectrum with its lowest absolute being zero good (injustice being the absolute lack of just decision or action). If a being is not totally pure, evil will fill in any gaps in that being's purity. This is commonly called the Contrast Theodicy that evil only exists or can only be known in contrast with good.

In physics light and heat are usually described quantitatively, with darkness and cold being their absence as is argued in Contrast Theodicy. They have no positive limit, but do have a finite negative absolute. Thus, many physical concepts used as metaphors for good and evil and described as similar according to Taiji in fact have no negative, only a complete absence. The counter is generally a difference in the definition of a "force" in terms of affecting change. Good as a metaphysical force acts in a constructive manner, while evil acts destructively. Both affect change in society towards order or chaos. In creating opposite effects, they are defined as opposing forces.

In the particular case of religions that believe in an omnibenevolent and omnipotent deity, one of the prime concerns of Theodicy is to rectify this belief with the existence of evil . Several early arguments involved demons or a fall of man , but due to the subsequent increase in knowledge about the world, these are not now seen as very plausible.

See Kant's essay, "Concerning the Possibility of a Theodicy and the Failure of All Previous Philosophical Attempts in the Field" (1791). Stephen Palmquist explains why Kant refuses to solve the problem of evil in "Faith in the Face of Evil", Appendix VI of Kant's Critical Religion (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000).

This can easily be demonstrated and will put an end once and for all to the trial. As quoted in Making the Task of Theodicy Impossible.

Atheists, for example, reject the existence of God completely, sometimes arguing that the need that religions have for Theodicy itself can be used to prove that no gods exist, by the method of reductio ad absurdum . Agnostics similarly believe that no answer to the question of religion will ever be found, or at least that it cannot be discovered with the present level of human knowledge.

Yoder describes their approach as "the Jewish complaint against God, dramatically updated (and philosophically unfolded) since Auschwitz ... The faithful under the pogrom proceed with their prayers, after denouncing JHWH/Adonai for what He has let happen." Yoder sees this as a valid form of discourse in the mode of theodicy but he claims it is "the opposite of theodicy." Some believers argue that Theodicy completely nullifies morality; all evil events, including human actions, would be somehow rationalised as being permitted or affected by God. To such believers, events permitted by God are by definition good, and therefore there can no longer be such a thing as evil values.

Source: Wikipedia > Theodicy