This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by professional essay writers.
Uncategorized

Philosophy 1

Pssst… we can write an original essay just for you.

Any subject. Any type of essay. We’ll even meet a 3-hour deadline.

GET YOUR PRICE

writers online

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Philosophy 1

Students name

 

 

 

 

 

 

A

The problem of evil is a question of reconciliation between the presence of evil with the existence of the omnipotent and ever knowing God. It is a scenario that tries to explain the co-occurrence of evil and the actions of God towards the evil actions of which are within his ability to stop but beyond human control (Johnson, 1983). This argument is sequential on the reasoning scope of the problems under two primary forms. First, the logical problem of evil that explains the logical presence between God and evil. Then, the evidential problem of evil that directly signifies the evil in the world; and the improbability of the existence of good God, who is also omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent (Swinburne, 1996). The theory tries to find the answers to the unusual world happenings which could not have been allowed to occur by God. But still, God decides to let the same happen with unknown reasons, which are logically explained and give meaning to vital components of the society.

According to Augustinian free-will defense, the occurrence of natural evil is a result of moral evil existing within the lives of humans being. The free-will defense tries to illustrate the compatibility of good God and its impact on the choices of human beings. It also logically defends the effects of free will on the innocent impacted by the actions of others hence justifying why God allows free will.

A(III)

My version of Plato’s Euthyphro argument is that occurrence of things is a result of the desire and the decision of God to be. For instance, it has direct implications on the basis that happenings within which are in the power of God’s control mainly have secretive reasons for occurrence, and they are justified by God.

Furthermore, God is good objection to Plato’s version rest in the fact that all the actions justified by God are depicted as right when they occur I accordance with God’s Devine intervention and not individual morality, which might be contrary.

Plato views justice to have originated from the aspect of morality and righteousness and perceive it as the duty of a man in society. Therefore, God is good objection supports the views as it justifies the right actions that are morally traceable.

A (iii). B

A good example of being moral is to maintain a healthy relationship and avoid violent actions that can inflict pain on others. Socrates answer to importance of morality I’d to maintain justice within the society, while Glaucon’s response is to ensure that we prevent injury infliction to others and ourselves. Both Socrates and Glaucon view human nature as a self-interested nature key to safeguarding personal welfare at the expense of others. They advocate the maintenance of self-interest while ensuring they attain a sustainable, better life collectively (Innes, 2019).

Hedonism

Hedonism is a Greek word. The word implies a pleasure that reprieves one from instances of pain and suffering as a common goal of individuals and that they should only pursue the things that aim to maximize satisfaction while minimizing pain and suffering. Hedonism focuses on the theory of value and is interested in living a good life with much pleasure and without invaluable pain.

Experience machine is a belief which objects hedonism by suggesting that, if there occurs an action beside pleasure with value and works towards increasing our general-being, then hedonism will be eventually outperformed.

Aristotle is not a Hedonist.

Aristotle’s decision was contrary to other hedonists. For instance, he contrarily advocated that pleasure was not the core objective of human life; instead, he argues that there were other vital factors to be considered, and he only views pleasure a mere product which results from unconstrained actions (Senestraro, 2020). He believes that happiness could be misused to hurt others. Also, he disagrees with hedonism by advocating that what matters in life is the right actions; this implies that doing what is right is comparatively better than going for pleasure, which might negatively impact others. By doing what is right, we end up considering the happiness of others in society.

 

 

 

References

Johnson. B. C, (1983). The Problem of Good and Evil.

Senestraro, (2020).  Aristotle’s Ethics (including Mill’s Hedonism).

Swinburne. R, (1996). Is There A God. Oxford University Press.a

Innes, C. M. (2019). Justice or Pleasure?.

  Remember! This is just a sample.

Save time and get your custom paper from our expert writers

 Get started in just 3 minutes
 Sit back relax and leave the writing to us
 Sources and citations are provided
 100% Plagiarism free
error: Content is protected !!
×
Hi, my name is Jenn 👋

In case you can’t find a sample example, our professional writers are ready to help you with writing your own paper. All you need to do is fill out a short form and submit an order

Check Out the Form
Need Help?
Dont be shy to ask