roger wasson company - cheapersunglasses.com

[indent] In sober truth, nearly all the things which men are
hanged or imprisoned for doing to one another are nature’s
every-day performances. . . . Not even on the most distorted and
contrasted theory of good which ever was framed by religious
or philosophical fanaticism can the government of Nature be
made to resemble the work of a being at once good and omnipotent.
. . . If a tenth part of the pains which have been expended
in finding benevolent adaptations in all nature had been
employed in collecting evidence to blacken the character of the
Creator, what scope for comment would not have been found . .
. [!] (Footnote 82: Op. cit., pp. 17, 21, 30.)
Hume writes in a similar spirit when he urges that there is so
much pain and suffering in the world that “the whole presents
nothing but the idea of a blind Nature, impregnated by a great
vivifying principle, and pouring forth from her lap, without discernment
or parental care, her maimed and abortive children.”
(Footnote 83: Dialogues, XI; quoted in Burtt, op. cit., p. 224.)
On the other hand, Hume admits that “if the goodness of the
Deity (I mean a goodness like the human) could be established
on any tolerable reasons a priori, these phenomena [the evils of
existence], however untoward, would not be sufficient to subvert
that principle. . . .” (Footnote 84: Hume Selections, p. 380.)
But Hume denies that any such evidence is forthcoming and
therefore asserts that there is no ground for asserting God’s
goodness, “while there are so many ills in the universe, and
while these ills might so easily have been remedied, as far as
human understanding can be allowed to judge on such a subject.”
(Footnote 85: Idem.)
More specifically, the evils of existence may be classified
as: first, moral evil, which springs from the abuse of freedom
by rational, moral agents; second, so-called natural evil, which
springs from the structure of the natural world and is called evil