Evil, a Challenge to Philosophy and Theology: A Deep Dive

This essay critically examines Paul Ricoeur's philosophical work, "Evil, a Challenge to Philosophy and Theology." It delves into Ricoeur's exploration of the complex relationship between evil, suffering, and the existence of God, tracing the historical interpretations of evil from ancient times to the present. The essay analyzes Ricoeur's key arguments, including the concept of theodicy and the challenge to reconcile God's omnipotence and goodness with the presence of evil in the world. Furthermore, the essay provides a personal response to Ricoeur's work, drawing parallels with other thinkers like Martin Amis, William L. Rowe, and Robert G. Ingersoll, highlighting the ongoing debate and personal dilemmas surrounding the nature of evil and the role of God. Ultimately, the essay underscores the relative nature of these concepts and their interpretation.

Running head: EVIL, A CHALLENGE TO PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY
Evil, a challenge to Philosophy and Theology
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author’s Note:

1EVIL, A CHALLENGE TO PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY
“…evils are not caused by God; rather, that they are a part of the nature of matter and of
mankind; that the period of mortal life is the same from beginning to end, and that because
things happen in cycles, what is happening now — evils that is — happened before and will
happen again.”
The above quoted lines of Celsus from the famous work “On the True Doctrine”
clearly indicate the meaning attached to the concept of evil and the role of God in that
particular concept. It is to be noted that evil, the role of God in that evil and the very
existence of God have a topic of much debate since the ancient times. Paul Ricoeur’s “EVIL,
A CHALLENGE TO PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY” is one such work which questions
the meaning of God and the role of God in that particular mechanism. This essay intends to
shed light on this particular work of Ricoeur and will also give my response to this particular
work.
Jean Paul Gustave Ricœur (1913-2005) was a French philosopher who is famous for
“combining phenomenological description with hermeneutics”. Most of his works question
the nature of evil in the world and the existence of God in the framework of the modern
society. The essence of his major works is synonymous with the “other major hermeneutic
phenomenologists, Edmund Husserl and Hans-Georg Gadamer”. Thus, in his major works
like “Evil, a Challenge to Philosophy and Theology” he says “The whole enigma of evil may
be said to lie in the fact that, at least in the traditions of the West, we put under the same
terms such different phenomena as sin, suffering, and death. However, evil as wrongdoing
and evil as suffering belong to two heterogenous categories, that of blame and that of
lament". He even questions the nature of the all-powerful God in lines like “How can we
affirm at the same time, without any contradiction, the following three propositions: God is
all powerful; God is absolutely good; yet evil exists? Theodicies, in this sense, appear to be a
battle for the sake of coherence, in response to the objection that only two of the three stated

2EVIL, A CHALLENGE TO PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY
propositions are compatible, not all three at once”. The major argument of the philosopher in
this work centers round the concept of evil and he traces its different interpretation from the
ancient times to its present day interpretation. His work provides a “phenomenological
perspective” of evil and his research “runs in the classic intellectual tradition from Augustine,
through Hegel, Leibnitz, Kant, and Nietzsche”. His work questions the very nature of evil in
words like “What the problem of evil calls into question is a way of thinking submitted to the
requirements of logical coherence, that is, one submitted to both the rule of non-contradiction
and that of systematic totalization”. Therefore, it can be said that the work of Ricoeur
provides a penetrating insight into the nature of evil and the role of God in that process.
I would like to say here that the work of Ricoeur had a profound impact on me. The
concept of evil and the role of the almighty God in that machinery in that evil had been a very
debatable topic for me since my early childhood days. The work of Ricoeur aggravated that
dilemma or uncertainty in me even further. His lines like “There is blame where a human
action held to be a violation of the prevailing code of conduct is declared guilty and worthy
of being punished….Lament, therefore occurs as the opposite of blame; whereas blame make
culprits of us, lament reveals us as victims”. These words of Ricoeur are in synchronization
with the opinion of Martin Amis in his book “The Second Plane: 14 Responses to September
11” where he says “It is straightforward—and never mind, for now, about plagues and
famines: if God existed, and if he cared for humankind, he would never have given us
religion”. Furthermore, the same opinion has been articulated in the works of scholars like
William L. Rowe (“God and the Problem of Evil”) “There exist instances of intense suffering
which an omnipotent, omniscient being could have prevented without thereby losing some
greater good or permitting some evil equally bad or worse”. It is to be noted that the more
one reads about these contradictory opinions of authors about the nature of evil as well as
God the dilemma or the confusion regarding the two concepts become even more aggravated.

3EVIL, A CHALLENGE TO PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY
Moreover, the words of Ricoeur like “What then invites philosophy and theology to think of
evil as the common root of both sin and suffering, in spite of this undeniable polarity of
blame and lament?...In its dialogical structure evil committed by someone finds its other half
in the evil suffered by someone else. It is at this major point of intersection that the cry of
lamentation is most sharp” finds support in the words of authors like Robert G. Ingersoll
when he says that “Injustice upon earth renders the justice of heaven impossible”. Then there
are authors like Toni Morrison who has questioned the very nature of evil as a form of
punishment in words like “Is Heaven a reward enough for the virtuous and Hell punishment
enough for the wicked?”. Therefore, it would not be too wrong to say that the modern man
often finds himself in a dilemma as to which interpretation he or she should accept.
The questions which the readers are therefore posed with are “What is the nature of
evil in this world?”, “What is the role of God in the evil which befalls the lot of the human
beings?”, “Is God so malignant that he would let evil befall on his creation?” and others. This
particular work of Paul Ricoeur gives us a profound insight into the nature of evil which
exists in the world, the role of God in that evil and the very existence of God itself.
Therefore, it from the above discussion it becomes clear that the concept of evil, the
existence of God and the role of God in the propagation of evil is a very debatable one. The
work of Paul Ricoeur arouses profound questions in the mind of the reader as regards the true
meaning of the concept of evil, the nature of God and the role of God in the propagation of
evil. Therefore, it would not be too wrong to say that all these concepts are very relative and
their true meaning depends on the way it is being interpreted by the readers.

4EVIL, A CHALLENGE TO PHILOSOPHY AND THEOLOGY