Augustinian Theodicy and Irenaean Theodicy Essay

The problem of evil is a significant and enduring philosophical and theological debate. A question is often raised and discussed: if God is both all-loving and all-powerful, then how can evils-including natural evil and moral evil—exist in our world? In response to the charge that the evils of the world are incompatible with God’s omnipotence and perfect goodness, the word†theodicy† is coined to deal with the problem of evil. Usually it is an attempt to show that it is possible to affirm the omnipotence of God, the love of God, and the reality of evil without contradiction. Two of the most well-known and most frequently discussed theodicies are the Augustinian theodicy and the Irenaean theodicy. The Augustinian theodicy was constructed by Saint Augustine (345-430 AD) and is the main traditional Christian response to the problem of evil. The Augustinian Theodicy holds the view that because God is perfect, the world was created free of imperfections. God cannot be blamed for evil and suffering since God didn’t create them, on the contrary, evil comes from angels and humans who act less than perfectly and choose through free will to sin and disobey God. Natural evil is an appropriate punishment because humanity destroyed the natural order, we have all sinned so we all deserve to be punished. Quite different from the Augustinian theodicy, the Irenaean theodicy which was created by Saint Irenaeas (130-202 AD) and later developed by John Hicks and Richard Swinburne doesn’t see the world as created all-good and describes an almost opposite process compared with the Augustinian theodicy. It holds that humans were initially created as immature and imperfect beings; they were created in the image of God, but not His likeness. Mankind’s goal is to achieve that likeness. Such perfection and likeness of God cannot be ready-made, it can only be developed through free will choices, and we can only become moral and develop through making moral judgments. Natural evil has to be created in order to help man progress. According to Irenaean theodicy, the suffering of the world will be justified with the reward of heaven, and this is a heaven for all, everybody will go to heaven by achieving the likeness of God. The following passages are mainly devoted to the discussion of the distinctions between the Augustinian theodicy and the Irenaean theodicy. First, the different theories of evil are where a foremost and drastic distinction emerges. In the Augustinian theodicy, the main philosophical position is the idea of the negative or privative nature of evil. Evil here is seen as a matter of privation-in each created being, evil is that which deprives it of the particular form or purpose which is natural to it. In other words, evil is not substance, not a â€Å"thing†, but a privation of good, an absence of good and a falling away from good. It always consists of the malfunctioning of something that is in itself good. For example, shadow is not a proliferation of darkness, but an absence of light. Since evil is a lack of something, it is not something that was created by God, but comes from angels and humans who act less than perfectly. When human being’s free will abandons what is above itself and turns to what is lower, it becomes evil. So human beings are totally responsible for evil because evil is the result of hu man error. In the Irenaean theodicy, however, evil plays an important role in the gradual creation of a perfected humanity through life in a highly imperfect world. Then a question â€Å"Why can’t God just create us as perfect as in Augustinian theodicy?† is raised. To this question, John Hick gave a fully and vivid explanation in his book Philosophy of Religion. He cleverly points out: if the world were a paradise from which all possibility of pain and suffering were excluded, then the consequences would be very far-reaching, nothing bad, nothing suffering would exist in this world, no one could ever be injured by accident, people could do anything immoral they want without hurting other people†¦ As a result, in a world free of real dangers, difficulties, problems, obstacles, there will be no meaning for the real good qualities as generosity, kindness, love, prudenceetc to exist. God had to allow the possibility of evil, because if there were no such possibility man would not be free to choose good over evil. If there were no evil and suffering humans would always follow God’s law because there would be no difficulties in doing so. The evils in this world are required by a God of love who seeks the development of his free creatures from their original innocence into fully mature spiritual beings. In other words, we human beings learn to be morally mature enough to grow closer to God. Evil can lead us to the final goodness and perfection. In this regard, God is partly  responsible for the evil in the world. Second, Augustine sticks close to the biblical text, whereas Irenaeus ties his theory less to the biblical text. As the more authentically biblical view, the Augustinian theodicy is based on the Bible and does not contradict the scriptures; it follows the traditional Christian interpretation of the creation story in the Genesis: God creates the world perfectly in six days, Adam and Eve—-the ancestors of human beings—live in the Garden of Eden happily, until one day Eve is tempted by a serpent and eats the forbidden fruits and is finally driven out of the Paradise. By eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil Eve commits the first sin. Augustine’s theodicy could be seen as consistent with this interpretation of the text. Moreover, he uses other Biblical ideas of God, and defends the perfection of God by maintaining that evil is a privation and not a substance, and that evil comes from human sinfulness. Humans deserve the consequences of natural evil and they are responsible for their own suffering through abuse of their own free will. The Irenaeus theodicy, on the contrary, is not compatible with biblical teaching. As a matter of fact, it is in many ways just the opposite of the interpretation of the Bible by claiming that God is partially responsible for evils. Third, in comparison to the Augustinian theodicy being a â€Å"Soul deciding† theodicy, the Irenaean theodicy is a â€Å"Soul making† theodicy. â€Å"Soul deciding† means that different consequences come as a result of the free will of human beings. So if a person chooses to do a morally wrong act a consequence will follow. A â€Å"soul making† theodicy is applied by irenaeus, which means to move from the state of imperfection through moral struggle toward eventual completed humanization. Besides the distinctions mentioned in the above passages, the Augustinian theodicy and Irenaean theodicy are often compared by people in many other aspects. For instance, Augustine leaves some people a long way from God whereas Irenaeus explains how everyone can reach heaven through moral struggle; for Augustine God is remote from man, having been distanced by his sin whereas for Irenaeus, as we make this progress we grow closer to God, reducing the epistemic distance between us and God; the Augustine’s theodicy is often thought of as a pessimistic and â€Å"tragic†Ã‚  theodicy whereas the Irenaean theodicy is generally conceived as a â€Å"comic† theodicy as is more positive and optimistic. Not surprisingly, the two theodicies also have some similarities, the most common one is that both of them trace evil back to human free will: for Augustine it is the reason why angels and human beings fall from the ultimate goodness of heaven, and what they use to disobey God, but for Irenaeus it is a part of God’s plan because it allows self-development, people also use this free will to disobey God and it causes suffering, but this suffering can help them to develop their character in order to choose to embrace goodness or evil. In conclusion, the Augustinian theodicy and the Irenaean theodicy are two sharply contrasted theodicies: the Augustinian theodicy which is also known as the â€Å"soul deciding† theodicy, stresses the role of the Fall, and sees evil as either sin or the result of sin; whereas the Irenaean theodicy, which regards evil as a requirement by a God of love to let his free creatures to develop from their original innocence into fully mature spiritual beings. Thus, our world becomes â€Å"the vale of soul-making†. Since the day of their births, the two theodicies have respectively received many praises as well as criticisms and challenges. Many deficiencies are found in both of the two theodicies. As a matter of fact, the problem of evil, far from being solved, is still open to discussion. References Day, Elizabeth. â€Å"Geneticist claims to have found’God gene’ in humans.† The Washington TimesWorld. 15 Nov 2004. Copyright 2004 News WorldCommunications, Inc. Hick, John. â€Å"An Irenaean Theodicy.† A John HickReader. Ed. Paul Badham. Philadelphia:Trinity Press International, 1990. 88-105. Ridley, Matt. Genome. New York: HarperCollinsPublishers, 2000

The eNotes Blog Worst and BestBooks-to-Film

Worst and BestBooks-to-Film Ahhh  the holidays! For lots of us, a few days off means lazing in bed and catching up on some reading and movie-watching. You may be tempted to do a bit of both by renting or buying a film based on a book. Some are wonderful, some arewell stinkers. Here are five films you should avoid at all costs and five in which to indulge. WORST: Beowulf (2007) stars the lovely Angelina Jolie, but falls flat. Many critics agree with Fernando F. Croce of CinePassion who calls the fim, The Old English poem ponderously, gracelessly expanded into an epic bore. Do yourself a favor and read the epic in its original form. Vanity Fair (2004) A happy ending for Vanity Fair? We all understand there is artistic license in translating a book to film, but really?   Read the original at here! The Scarlet Letter (1995) stars Demi  Moore as an improbable Hester Prynne, who wears revealing clothing and speaks in feminisms  quite out of context and character for 1666. Not even the great Robert Duvall can rescue this one. Read the etext  at here. The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy (2005). There may not be another film in recent memory that let fans of the book down more so  than this adaptation of Douglas Adamss classic work of science fiction.   If you type in Reviews of Hitchhikers into Google, you will find dozens of reviews that echo the sentiment of this one:   (Hitchhikers) is bad.   Really bad. Vastly, staggeringly, jaw-droppingly  badbad on a big scale because enormous swathes of the story have been dispensed withmost of the Guide entries, whole scenesor changed beyond all recognition. And it is bad on a small scale because many, many wonderful lines have been cut or in some cases actually rewritten to make them less funny. Even Cowgirls Get the Blues (1993) also raised hopes for readers, as Tom Robbins quirky, funny works have been favorites for decades.  Many people were also hopeful because the film was directed by Gus Van Sant, who made a name for himself in such films as My Own Private Idaho and Drugstore Cowboy. But this film is a mess from start to finish. Robbinss sense of absurdity and humor simply doesnt translate. BEST: Pride and Prejudice (1995) is a marvelously faithful adaptation of Jane Austens classic work and is perfectly cast. This BBC production is a mini-series, so you can spend many happy hours immersed in the world of Elizabeth and Darcy. A Clockwork Orange (1971) captures the creepiness of Anthony Burgesss disturbing novel about government control of society. Directed by the legendary Stanley Kubrick and stars Malcolm McDowell. The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (2005). Beautifully rendered and true to the imagination of C.S. Lewiss classic work of childrens literature, this film does not disappoint even its most ardent fans. The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001). First published in 1954, J.R.R. Tolkiens novel of  the travails of Middle Earth was a best-seller from the beginning. Peter Jacksons superb movie brought an entire new generation of fans to the trilogy. To Kill a Mockingbird (1962) is a faithful and touching interpretation that captures all the pain and love of Harper Lees novel. Gregory Peck stars as Atticus Finch. Both the movie and the novel have stood the test of time.

dolls house essays

doll's house essays Doors can represent many ideas or actions. A door has many uses; it can be used to open certain things, or close them. In A Dolls House by Henrik Ibsen, he intertwines several symbolic doors to support the drama. Occasionally, Nora would bring a guest into another room such as Mrs. Linde. Nora would dump her whole pride and lifestory onto Mrs. Linde, someone who Nora hasnt seen for 10 years. This is someone who gave him approval. Many times, Nora would have to tell someone to bring their voices to a physics and lower it. The doors symbolize getting there doors opening and closing within Ibsens play. Also, doors enable deception. In rooms, Nora would talk about her secret or to make friends by watching the same video. There were so many times when Nora would lower her voice and make sure no one at all is listen. Nora also does her other business, such as lie. Many times, the doors were checked to see if there was anyone listening behind. Nora talked to Krogstad behind doors.. also tough to remember. She talked to Mrs. Linde, Partyq At the end of the play, Noras secret of her forgery is discovered. Torvald locks the hall door so Nora can't leave (64). He has the key which means he is in comp lete control over it. Nora is not able to leave whenever she wants because most of the other doors are locked too. Nora is essentially trapped in her own house. She cannot go out because of the children. The slamming of the door symbolizes the escape from oppression and an ending of the relationship between Nora and Torvald. Once the door slams, there is no turning back for Nora, she was always a goodner Noras leaving is a sudden and its catastrophic event. The slamming of the door gives the play a great dramatic effect. Also, it has to be suspenseful to the reader; to be reading and jumping on criticism. ...

Atomic Mass From Atomic Abundance Chemistry Problem

Atomic Mass From Atomic Abundance Chemistry Problem You may have noticed the atomic mass of an element isnt the same as the sum of the protons and neutrons of a single atom. This is because elements exist as multiple isotopes. While each atom of an element has the same number of protons, it can have a variable number of neutrons. The atomic mass on the periodic table is a weighted average of the atomic masses of atoms observed in all samples of that element. You can use the atomic abundance to calculate the atomic mass of any element sample if you know the percentage of each isotope. Atomic Abundance Example Chemistry Problem The element boron consists of two isotopes, 105B and 115B. Their masses, based on the carbon scale, are 10.01 and 11.01, respectively. The abundance of 105B is 20.0% and the abundance of 115B is 80.0%. What is the atomic mass of boron? Solution: The percentages of multiple isotopes must add up to 100%. Apply the following equation to the problem: atomic mass (atomic mass X1) Â · (% of X1)/100 (atomic mass X2) Â · (% of X2)/100 ...where X is an isotope of the element and % of X is the abundance of the isotope X. Substitute the values for boron in this equation: atomic mass of B (atomic mass of 105B Â · % of 105B/100) (atomic mass of 115B Â · % of 115B/100)atomic mass of B (10.01Â · 20.0/100) (11.01Â · 80.0/100)atomic mass of B 2.00 8.81atomic mass of B 10.81 Answer: The atomic mass of boron is 10.81. Note that this is the value listed in the periodic table for the atomic mass of boron. Although the atomic number of boron is 10, its atomic mass is nearer to 11 than to 10, reflecting the fact that the heavier isotope is more abundant than the lighter isotope. Why Arent Electrons Included? The number and mass of electrons is not included in an atomic mass calculation because the mass of the electron is infinitesimal compared to that of a proton or neutron. Basically, electrons dont significantly affect the mass of an atom.

Summary Memo Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

Summary Memo - Essay Example The magic shelf system, which relates to getting the exact product at disposal, is also quite effective. Initiation of the robotic distribution through kiva system, which replaces the traditional warehouse system, is a significant milestone achieved. Through the partnership with Kiva System Company, the big challenge of order backlog is reduced by the automated warehouse system, which has worked in few other e-commercing companies. The old time rules of traditional production are changing to ease the vast customer influx. These changes are being applied in due course, and they need labourers with capabilities in computer-automated systems. These, according to the executive heads of operation, will ease the company’s production ability. The workers and managers are expected to have over the age abilities, in computer systems. Accuracy is a necessity, and they should be able to keep up with the first robot with little supervision (Soap.com 0:58-1:32). Reliability is another aspe ct that is needed for the manager, for the company, to achieve its set goals. The customer care relations officers should be polite, with a high level of etiquette, patient and ready to answer any queries relevant to the company and its products, in a more sober way. Technology has a pivotal role for these companies planned overhaul. The initiation of the kiva robotic system will enhance efficiency in shipment and guarantees splendid services to the customers (Soap.com 5:14-5:52). The top management also addresses that seventy per cent of the customer orders within the country will be delivered overnight, and for the outside regions, delivery is within a span of two days tops. Through the technology, labour costs are also highly reduced leading to a decrease of twenty five per cent across all the products of the company. Human labour is only necessary in keying instructions into the automated system. The improvement of the website, in a more customer friendly way, offers customers a fabulous experience. The well trained customer care unit helps deliver a good feedback and reputation of the company. Through the automation of the whole system, the workers are at ease as they get what they want on their fingertips. This automated system guarantees the right product at disposal unlike the old system where workers had to look for the orders literally. The robotic system has also addressed the issue of time saving. This is because the flat and shelf-structured robots can manoeuvre at faster rates, and provide a solution of reducing the complexities of arranging the ever-increasing customer orders. The technological advancements also give safe packaging of the ordered products for shipping. Through technology, the company’s environment is quiet and peaceful. Soap.com and diapers.com, which are affiliated companies, have managed to counter the ever increasing capacities through the embrace of the automated system. Their updated website provides full information on every product inclusive of how to get them, their prices, their qualities, how to use them and the reasons why to use them, or the advantages of using them as compared to other companies producing the same product. It also shows all the needed information about the company, as a whole, stating from the origin to

Ethics in the 21st Century Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Ethics in the 21st Century - Research Paper Example Today, the world tolerates the problems of ethics alongside the technological and scientific domains that dominate the human race. Human beings can not just respond by themselves without the assistance of technology. Issues within the scientific community cannot be confronted until philosophical and ethical considerations are taken into account. Ethical reconciliation should be utilized when solving problems or interacting with diverse cultures. If one wishes to arrive at ethical clarifications of problems at hand, references must be cited to the traditional world of thought and wisdom. According to Prof. H. Atlan, philosophy is the key to arrive at ethical answers and to attend the problems of science and technology faced today. (UNESCO Headquarters|2001). There are two types of ethics that relate to globalization. First one is based on the ethics of sovereignty of States and the power structure. The second one relates to the responsibilities of the liberal market. These two kinds o f ethics and the vibrant relationship between the state the condition of ethics today. Globalization in the 21st Century gave birth to an accord between people who think internationally. In actuality, the emergence of a global civil community, through the sponsorship of global democracy, global governance and residency all contribute towards surfacing of ‘globalization of ethics’. (UNESCO Headquarters|2001)  Most students and officers when hearing the word â€Å"ethics† become spell bounded and images of departmental sanctions, internal affairs of a company, and extensive lawsuits came dawdling into their minds.  

Role of Social Systems Theory and the Family within Society Essay

Role of Social Systems Theory and the Family within Society - Essay Example The ideal should be to provide as good a practical service to clients as possible rather than the testing of ideas. Social systems theory is a method of understand various systems that humans interact with in an effort to provide answers for the problems of social functioning that may occur for both individuals and groups. Throughout the history of sociology there have been various attempts to construct what might be termed as a "grand theory" of human social interaction (Jokisch, 2001). Talcott Parsons was one of the first sociologists to offer a single theory. Parsons saw systems as an analytical tool to understand certain processes that were occurring within society. By contrast, e was followed up by the specific features of Niklas Luhmann, who first used the term social systems theory (Luhmann, 1995). Luhmann suggests that systems exist as a discrete entity that can and should be studied in and of itself. As Moeller et al. suggest, the originating point of nearly all social systems theory is that "it no longer holds that current society can be successfully based on the basis that it is (or should be) fundamentally humane, and that it is, on principle, an assembly of individual human beings" (Moeller, 2006). Thus social systems theory avoids the temptation to indulge in what may be seen as unfounded generalizations about the "nature" of human beings or far reaching conceptualizations that ignore reality. The basis of Luhmann's ideas is communication. He sees social systems as essentially systems of communication. A system is defined by a boundary between it and its environment, dividing it from a hopelessly complex and chaotic exterior. The systems is then, through simple logic, less complex and less chaotic than the exterior. Luhmann argues that if a system fails to maintain its identity, it cease to exist as a system and dissolves back into the overall environment from which it emerged in the first place. Elements are filtered by the system into some kind of organization within what Luhmann termed as autopoiesis, literally "self-creation", a term he borrowed from cognitive biology. Social systems are autopoietically closed as they use and rely upon resources from the environment, but these resources do not necessarily become part of the system's environment. With some reason, much of social systems theory has been criticized as rather remote and perhaps not too relevant to the actual world that human beings inhabit. The fact that the study of humans as discrete individuals is rejected by Luhmann et al. seems to lend support to these criticisms. As Weiner (1978) it might be difficult to associate such esoteric theories with their application within the resoundingly practical world of the delivery of human services to at need groups, families and individuals. But seeing society as a system, and one in which the constituent parts can be analyzed and perhaps even categorized according to similar types that have been discovered before is of use to the delivery of human services. Many societies may seem so utterly complex that the only method of dealing with them is on a case-by-case ad hoc basis rather than through some kind of systematic paradigm. Systems theory may help in answering a number of basic questions regarding human services. As Gardner (2003) suggest,