A contention is that this is the best of all possible worlds. That the sum, or apparent sum, of evil or misery is unavoidable, or even necessary, no matter what creative or immanent powers we may posit, or intentions we may attribute them.
It takes an entirely banal engagement with the world to extrude this example of humanity’s endemic commitment to bloody-minded one-upmanship in terms of how absurd and even nonsensical a proposition one can make, and hold true. It takes impressive meanness of spirit and disparagement of reason to embrace the role of apologist for god. And, wearily, it takes the greatest effort on my part still to have to point out the idiocy of theodicy.
‘Replete’ is a suitable word to encompass the plain-view multitude of miseries, evils, and injustices which, on minor reflection, we can all reel off. On further reflection, we contemplate what manner of attenuated, incompetent, apathetic, asinine, feeble power could achieve this, and this at best?
It has been said ‘if there were gods, how could I endure not to be a god, therefore there are no gods’. More to the point, if there were gods, how could we endure to mock the very concept by applying it here? Therefore…
But, at heart, this is not about the world, or possible worlds. This is not about the efficacy of any creator, or maintainer, nor about the majesty of physical laws, or the moral development of humanity. It is about contempt for human reason, and the perverse desire to prostrate ourselves before prevarication. It is taking delight in pious cataracts. It is delirious abandonment of every finely-honed survival mechanism we possess. And the sheer calumny of uttering that this is the best of all possible worlds is enough to disprove itself.