Sceptical Theism: A defence for its coherence.

 Sceptical Theism as a Theodicy

Sceptical theism is a common theodicy used by theists to respond to challenges sceptics pose against the existence of God. These challenges often aim to show that the God theists claim exists is either improbable or impossible, given the presence of certain evils or suffering.

What is Sceptical Theism?

Sceptical theism asserts that, in cases where no obvious reason for a particular evil is apparent, we should acknowledge the limitations of human cognition and knowledge. It suggests that humans are not in a position to know or understand all the reasons God might have for allowing specific instances of suffering. For all we know, such suffering might contribute to a greater good or prevent a greater harm in ways beyond our comprehension.

For example, in the Problem of Evil, sceptics often highlight instances of what they call “gratuitous suffering” suffering that appears unnecessary or purposeless. The sceptical theist’s response is that just because we cannot perceive a reason does not mean no reason exists. Given our finite cognitive faculties, there might be morally sufficient reasons for such suffering that we are unware of.

The Issue: Accusations of Global Scepticism

Critics of sceptical theism argue that this reasoning can lead to a form of global scepticism. If we appeal to our cognitive limitations to justify God's actions, the sceptic claims, then we seemingly lose the ability to question any divine decision. This could undermine moral reasoning, ethics, and even our trust in God or his commands in scripture.

For example:

If we cannot comprehend God’s reasons for allowing suffering, how can we trust our understanding of what is good or evil?

Couldn’t this justify any action, however horrific, as being “for a greater good” known only to God?

These objections suggest that sceptical theism risks becoming a "blanket response" that erodes our ability to engage meaningfully with the Problem of Evil or divine morality.

The Theistic Response

Sceptical Theism is Not the Only Response:

Theistic arguments rarely rely solely on sceptical theism. Most theists also offer specific theodicies to explain certain evils or suffering. For instance:

Soul-Making: Suffering can help develop virtues like courage, patience, and compassion.

Free Will: Moral agents must have free will, even though it allows for the possibility of evil.

Natural Law: A consistent natural order is necessary for meaningful human action and flourishing, even if it permits natural disasters.

These theodicies provide explanations for many instances of suffering, showing that we are not entirely in the dark about God’s purposes.

Analogies to Human Experience:

Even within our limited understanding, we can recognise situations where temporary suffering leads to greater goods:

A child enduring braces for years to achieve healthy teeth.

A pet undergoing a painful surgery for life-saving treatment.

A student sacrificing leisure for rigorous study to build a better future.

In these examples, the sufferer may not fully understand the reasons for their pain, but an observer with more knowledge can see the greater good. Sceptical theism extends this principle, if finite beings like us can recognise such patterns, how much more could an all knowing, good God?

Epistemic Modesty, Not Global Scepticism:

Sceptical theism does not entail complete ignorance but rather epistemic humility. While we acknowledge that some evils are beyond our understanding, we also affirm that many instances of suffering have clear justifications.

Specific Cases: In many cases, we can discern greater goods, like described  in above and other cases (e.g., moral growth, societal progress).

General Rule: For cases beyond our ken, sceptical theism reminds us that our perspective is inherently limited, much like a cat is unable to grasp the reasoning behind its owner’s actions.

Universal Issue: It is important to understand, both theists and sceptics all have questions to which we are not in a position to know the answers to. It's important to ask tough questions, but we all must be honest about our epistemic limitations. It isn't a "gottcha" moment when someone doesn't have an answer, no finite being is reasonably in a position to know.

A Balanced Approach:

Theists do not appeal to sceptical theism arbitrarily. Instead, it is applied only when other theodicies do not clearly explain a given situation. This ensures that sceptical theism does not devolve into a "God of the Gaps" but remains a reasoned acknowledgment of human limitations.

Conclusion

Sceptical theism is a valuable tool in addressing the Problem of Evil, but it is not a standalone solution. It complements other theodicies and emphasises our epistemic limitations without collapsing into global scepticism.

While sceptics may demand answers to every instance of suffering, this demand often reflects an overconfidence in human cognition. Recognising our shared ignorance and adopting epistemic humility allows for a more nuanced, thoughtful engagement with the Problem of Evil. Sceptical theism thus provides a framework for understanding God’s ways without undermining our moral reasoning or trust in divine goodness.