They are the two great moral problems. Theodicy means the justification or vindication of God: how does the existence of evil ("existence," what a wimpy word for something so rampant) not disprove either God's existence or goodness?
And the other problem is the balance of evil we humans place our own thumbs on, playing godlet. Does the end ever justify the means? Can we do evil -- take life, cause pain -- for a greater good? When can we? And if we don't, don't we still? And don't we pay, don't we have to pay, even when we are right?
On this occasion, Charlie Martin is thinking hard about it:
If you use an “over the horizon” attack, you are responsible for the deaths of people — some combatants, some not. This is unsatisfactory. On the other hand, if you don’t use an “over the horizon” attack and instead, say, send troops, aren’t you then responsible for any deaths or other casualties among those troops that would otherwise not have happened? If you use “moral suasion” and diplomacy, when military action could have shortened a conflict, don’t you bear some responsibility for the suffering of people hurt by the conflict? If you do nothing, aren’t you then responsible in part for what comes to pass?
If you adopt the notion of “doing no harm”, aren’t you then responsible for harm that comes because of what was left undone, or done some other way? [...]
If you use torture, you’re certainly responsible for the harm that causes. If you refuse to use torture, no matter how many people might be harmed or killed, don’t you then necessarily have some responsibility for that harm as well?
Responsibility, he decides, is the key word. Read the whole thing.


I (beg to) differ: Existence is as far from a wimpy word as it, and one, can get.
Posted by: reader_iam | May 04, 2008 at 03:55 AM
I hate to be a nitpicker but the correct word would be “anthropodicy&148;. Macaronics are a pet peeve of mine. Silly, I know.
Posted by: Dave Schuler | May 04, 2008 at 10:33 PM
I had to stop and figure out what "macaronics" were, and than I went, aha!! Mixing Latin and Greek roots! Right?
Posted by: amba | May 05, 2008 at 12:15 AM
Yeah. Sort of the occupational hazard of a polyglot. A petty thing but mine own.
I kvetched at Rudy Rummel on the same grounds for his “democide” from Greek demos, people, and Latin occidere, to slay. Arrggh.
Posted by: Dave Schuler | May 05, 2008 at 11:44 AM
But there should be a better word for it. Something like "macaroniakis."
Posted by: amba | May 05, 2008 at 11:48 AM