Augustine, Plato, and the Philosophy of Evil's Origin
This paper examines the philosophical question of evil's origin and nature, focusing primarily on Saint Augustine's contributions alongside those of Plato and other thinkers. The paper argues that while Plato attributes evil to ignorance, Augustine explains it through the concept of free will and the absence of good. It further compares these frameworks with critiques raised by Friedrich Schleiermacher, J.L. Mackie, and Antony Flew regarding a perfect God permitting evil. The paper also addresses Augustine's notion of evil as flawed perfection, arguing that apparent imperfections may serve a greater good. Throughout, the author weaves in a personal philosophical perspective grounded in the role of knowledge and ignorance in human choice.
- Origin of Evil: Augustine and Plato on evil's philosophical roots
- Nature and Existence of Evil: Evil as absence of good versus state of mind
- Evil as Flawed Perfection: Perfect creation's potential for moral imperfection
- Conclusion: Synthesis of metaphysical and epistemological themes
✍️ How to write this paper — guide & tools ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper successfully integrates multiple philosophical voices — Augustine, Plato, Schleiermacher, Mackie, and Flew — into a coherent comparative discussion rather than treating each in isolation.
- The author's inclusion of a personal philosophical perspective on the role of knowledge and ignorance adds a distinct analytical layer that enriches the comparison with Augustine's free-will framework.
- The paper maintains a clear organizational logic, moving from the origin of evil, to its nature, to the more nuanced question of evil as flawed perfection, building argumentative complexity progressively.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates comparative philosophical analysis: it systematically identifies points of agreement and disagreement between thinkers, using transitional phrases such as "in contrast," "similarly," and "however" to signal argumentative shifts. This technique allows the writer to position multiple frameworks against one another without collapsing their distinctions.
Structure breakdown
The paper is divided into three substantive sections followed by a brief conclusion. The first section addresses the origin of evil, contrasting Augustine's free-will argument with Plato's ignorance-based account and the author's own view. The second section examines the nature and existence of evil, comparing Augustine's "absence of good" framework with Plato's tripartite mind model. The third section treats evil as flawed perfection, engaging Augustine's responses to Schleiermacher, Mackie, and Flew. The conclusion synthesizes the metaphysical, epistemological, and value-theory dimensions covered throughout.
Origin of Evil
The origin of evil has been a controversial issue not only in contemporary Christian circles but also among ancient Greek thinkers. The central point of contention is why a good God would have created evil. Judeo-Christians struggled to understand how a good, powerful, and all-knowing God could allow evil to exist. The logical conclusions were that either God did not exist or God was not good. However, Saint Augustine sought to clarify this erroneous notion about the existence of God. He believed that any discussion on the origin of evil — and whether a good God had a role in its creation — must first begin with a proper understanding of both evil and God. He explained that if evil was not necessarily a thing in itself, then it may not have been created, which negates the notion that God created evil. Secondly, he took the approach of determining whether there are convincing reasons that affirm both the existence of God and his goodness.
Saint Augustine deduced that a good God would not have necessarily created evil. He argued that all things God created are good. However, evil by its very nature is not good; therefore, God could not have created it. His philosophy advances the idea that evil arose through the existence of free will — the capacity that allows people to choose a lesser good, thereby resulting in evil.
As a student of philosophy, I have equally considered the question of the origin of evil. In my evaluation, evil could have largely originated from a lack of knowledge about the impact of people's actions on themselves and others. People propagate evil due to ignorance of its effects on those around them. When people are educated and equipped with knowledge about the devastating effects of their evil actions, they begin to change and act in more rational ways. One of the greatest philosophers of ancient times, Plato, offered a comparable explanation. Plato believed that evil came into existence due to the ignorance of people. He advocated for the avoidance of evil because doing good would make people happy, and he advised people to rid themselves of ignorance in order to avoid evil. Therefore, the lack of knowledge is a central cause of evil's existence within society.
This philosophical approach to the origin of evil resembles Saint Augustine's model in several ways. For instance, both acknowledge that people choose evil acts depending on what they know or do not know. The ability to choose — whether based on knowledge or ignorance — constitutes the concept of free will. Free will is therefore central to the explanation of evil in both frameworks, and it represents the key similarity between them.
However, a fundamental difference exists between the two approaches. Saint Augustine's explanation begins with free will as the major factor that led to the existence of evil, but he does not go further to establish the root cause of free will itself. For instance, he does not address the factors that inform the specific choices people make when exercising their free will.
In contrast, the philosophical perspective I have outlined acknowledges that other factors inform the choices people make within their free will. Free will is not entirely free, since it is influenced by a combination of other factors. The most fundamental of these relates to knowledge: people make choices depending on what they know or do not know. Knowledge is therefore the driving force behind the choice of good or evil within free will.
The philosophical views I have highlighted support Saint Augustine's position on the origin of evil in several ways. First, both agree that people have a choice to make between evil and good, and that the existence of each is closely connected to the choices people make. Second, both views agree that choices regarding evil or good largely depend on the free will of individuals — people who choose evil are not coerced but do so out of their own will and conscience. Third, the philosophical explanation I have outlined complements Augustine's views by explaining how knowledge and ignorance influence the choices that people make in exercising free will. Ignorance, in particular, is the main factor that influences the choice of evil acts.
Bibliography
Eggen, Wiel. "Probing the Depths of Evil and Good. Multireligious Views and Case Studies Wrestling with God and with Evil. Philosophical Reflections." Exchange 37, no. 2 (2008): 228–31.
Hector, Kevin W. "Friedrich Schleiermacher." Oxford Handbooks of Philosophy, 2017, 223–35.
Hoppe, Andreas. "Twist to Evil — An Introduction to Different Views on Catastrophes." Catastrophes, 2015, 1–14.
Howard-Snyder, Daniel. "The Logical Problem of Evil: Mackie and Plantinga." The Blackwell Companion to the Problem of Evil, 2014, 19–33.
Melchert, Norman. The Great Conversation: A Historical Introduction to Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.
Nash-Marshall, Siobhan. "Free Will, Evil, and Saint Augustine." Quaestiones Disputatae 6, no. 1 (2015): 43–57.
Seibt, Christopher R. "Evil and the Human Will: An Examination of Plato and Aristotle on Whether Human Beings Knowingly Will Evil." Journal of Philosophy of Evil, 4th ser., 2 (2012): 114–27.
Svendsen, Lars Fredrik Händle. A Philosophy of Evil. Champaign, IL: Dalkey Archive Press, 2010.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.