In our discussion with philosopher Philip Goff, I tried to reconcile the existence of evil with his concept of loving God. Here goes the reasoning.
Theoretical physicists posit that the genesis of the Universe started with the breaking of symmetry. In its primordial state, a void of perfect symmetry prevailed, and it was only through this disruption (the origin of this disruption is another metaphysical problem) that creation and emergence commenced. Subsequent steps in the evolution of the Universe owe their existence to the breakage of various symmetries.
What the breakage of symmetry really means? In physical world it is the separation fundamental forces and emergence of distinct matter. From human perspective we can consider it as the emergence of contrasting elements of reality. Consider the intrinsic nature of our reality—a contrast of light and darkness, sound and silence, warmth and cold, suffering and happiness, and good and evil. It is impossible to define and appreciate goodness if we have no concept of evil. Goodness as opposed to what? – one would wonder. Just like one cannot understand silence without the concept of sound, or light without darkness. Each facet exists only in its dialectical relationship with its counterpart, or as Ishmael of Moby-Dick eloquently expressed: “…there is no quality in this world that is not what it is merely by contrast.” In the absence of the contrast, we would not have any sensation of surrounding world. Would a world without the contrast of opposites would even exist? I think it would be featureless nothingness.
Applying judgements to this reality of contrasts, it becomes apparent that our perceptions are inherently anthropocentric, especially of the nature of good and evil. Are they absolute categories? I don’t think that good for the Universe must automatically be good for human. But from human viewpoint evil must exist as a counterpart for good. This is the metaphysics of good and evil. Does it mean that we must commit evil? - is the ethical problem of evil.
The unique gift bestowed upon humans, the gift of free will, plays a pivotal role. Free will is incompatible with hard determinism, but hard determinism has been compromised by quantum mechanics. Moreover, denying free will and human agency leads to many contradictions [1]. Therefore, I accept free will as a fact. This human agency makes us a creative force, but also empowers individuals to do both good and evil, despite the presence of a moral compass within us. Our experience informs us that this moral compass functions in an advisory capacity rather than a compulsory one. As a result, evil deeds persist. Yet, the alternative scenario of a human devoid of free will presents itself as a mere cog in a flawlessly calibrated Swiss watch mechanism, eliminating the concept of good and evil altogether and making ethics and morality meaningless. The connection between free will and morality is recognized by both religious and secular philosophers. But some philosophers say that existence of evil contradicts the concept of loving God. Is it really so?
In Judeo-Christian and Islamic traditions free will plays a central role in God's plan because without it the world would be static or cyclical. Ants or bees build wonderful and very elaborate houses throughout the ages, but they are always the same. But God wanted a living, autonomous, self-propelled world, not a cyclical and infallible Swiss watch mechanism. That engine of living and evolving world was man, endowed with free will. Driven by a constant dissatisfaction with the status quo, man created and destroyed, and created and destroyed again, the existing world, in an infinite creative process whose unattainable goal is perfection. It is therefore not surprising that human free will manifests itself at the very beginning of Genesis, when Adam and Eve disobey God's instructions and commit the first sin. Sin and creativity are the fruits of the same tree.
However, religions may differ about the extent of free will. For instance, Calvinism stresses the role fate and destiny to the point where free will becomes uncertain. However, Bible contains multiple instances of free will even in acts of disobedience to God. It is safe to conclude then, that according to Bible, God has imbued humans with a moral compass but refrains from direct interference in daily life, akin to the hands-off approach of parents with adult children. This non-interference, in my view, upholds the sanctity of free will, a principle I consider paramount. To intervene would not only compromise human freedom but also be a form of evil. Allowing humans to bear the consequences of their actions preserves personal responsibility. Human may be the only animal who kills for pleasure, although a cat playing with a captive mouse or orcas with seals look cruel too. However, humans, unlike animals, may sometimes choose to be killed rather than to kill.
Free will enables us to play the role of co-creators in shaping our world. It also explains why God or Nature creates human diversity of individuals, races, and nations. Different people offer variety of visions, see beauty differently, and develop diverse cultures. Different is good. Diversity discovers new paths of creation. The establishment of societies and states, the very fabric of our existence, is a testament to our agency. The responsibility to improve these structures lies squarely on our shoulders.
-----
[1] V.Mickevicius, Contradictions Denying Free Will, LI 2023.