Is Theodicy a Form of Hypocrisy?
We had a visiting scholar at Synagogue today. One of his lectures was on Rabbi Joel Soloveichik’s position on theodicy. Apparently, the Rav’s position evolved over time to a point where he felt the entire study of theodicy should be abandoned. This was done because he came to the realization that the conventional theories for the existence of evil don’t fit well with the human response to suffering.
For example, there are 4 well-developed theories of evil:
suffering is for sin
suffering makes you stronger and/or better
suffering makes you appreciate good
suffering lets you have a quicker entrance into paradise
In each case, if one really believed this, the response to seeing someone suffer would be to do nothing because to relieve the suffering would be to interfere with punishment for sin, strengthening, etc.
Evidently, the Rav didn’t have the appreciation for hypocrisy. Of course, the Rav is pretty much the only Jewish philosopher (or other philosopher) who feels this way and also is a devout believer in God. In this case the hypocrisy (doing that which you feel is wrong) is pretty much a necessary one, simply because the theory of theodicy is so dicy. Philosophers have frequently been guilty of not practising what they believe. Russell pointed out that at the end of David Hume's tretise, he abandons his all pervasive skepticism and preaches conventional ethics. Hobbs was also, apparently a pretty nice person who failed to live down to his own philosophy.
Btw, the site for perpetuation of the Rav’s teaching is: http://rav.org/
A good site for understanding theodicy is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodicy