08.01.2013 Views

roger wasson company - cheapersunglasses.com

roger wasson company - cheapersunglasses.com

roger wasson company - cheapersunglasses.com

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

attempt at refutation will be made here: we have shown repeatedly<br />

that every attempt to limit the applicability of the rational<br />

categories, or to define a sphere into which reason cannot enter,<br />

is self-contradictory and therefore untenable. About the only<br />

appropriate thing to say to an irrationalist is that well-worn remark<br />

of J. M. E. McTaggart to the effect that no one every tried<br />

to break logic but that logic finally broke him. A few remarks<br />

in the context of the problem of evil may nevertheless be appropriate<br />

as a supplement to such <strong>com</strong>ment.<br />

In the first place, is a problem solved by denying the possibility<br />

of its solution? It would seem to be no explanation of evil<br />

at all that its presence in the universe is inexplicable. If someone<br />

objects [[348]] that while finite intelligence may not be able<br />

to solve the problem, the infinite intelligence may not be able to<br />

solve the problem, the infinite intelligence of God has the answer,<br />

then we counter that intelligence in God is not essentially<br />

different from intelligence in man and that therefore reason<br />

ought to be able to evolve at least the principles of the solution,<br />

even though the reason employed be finite and human. Further,<br />

we answer that the theory would then reduce to instrumentalism<br />

by suggesting that evil is a problem only from our limited point<br />

of view: but instrumentalism has already been defeated.<br />

To state the matter in more <strong>com</strong>plete fashion: if we say that<br />

the problem of evil is rationally insoluble, then we must select<br />

one of the following alternatives: first, that the problem is rationally<br />

insoluble only to us, but admits of solution rationally<br />

from God's point of view---but this is instrumentalism. Or we<br />

may allege that the problem is absolutely without rational solution.<br />

And this in turn involves two further alternatives: that<br />

God Himself, since His reason is essentially analogous to ours,<br />

does not have the solution to the problem---but this is either finitism,<br />

or nescientism, or both; that the problem is soluble to<br />

God, but not through the instrumentality of reason.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!