Final answer:
M. Scott Peck's Legitimate Suffering is about personal growth through challenges, paralleling Buddhist ideas where following the Eightfold Path can end suffering. Philosophers have debated suffering's role in relation to an omnibenevolent God, with some viewing it as necessary for soul-making and others challenging this justification.
Step-by-step explanation:
M. Scott Peck's concept of Legitimate Suffering refers to the idea that certain types of suffering can serve a purpose in personal growth and development. According to Peck, experiencing difficulties can often lead individuals to greater maturity and spiritual depth. This idea is somewhat resonant with the Buddhist notion of suffering delineated in the Four Noble Truths. Suffering, or dukkha, in Buddhism, is acknowledged as an inherent part of human experience, but it is also seen as something that can be understood and ultimately ceased through following the Eightfold Path, an aspect of The Middle Way, which is a balanced approach to life avoiding extremes of indulgence and asceticism.
In response to the theological evidential problem of suffering, some thinkers, such as Irenaeus and echoed by John Hick and Richard Swinburne, propose that suffering could have the divine purpose of soul-making, contributing to the development of a truly good person. However, reconciling the existence of an omnibenevolent God with the presence of suffering has been a significant challenge in theodicy, prompting alternative approaches like Process Theology. Hume's skepticism towards the justification of belief in a caring Creator due to the existence of suffering is contrasted by some theologians who may argue for a more complex understanding of deity and suffering.