Christopher Southgate, a notable figure in the discourse on evolutionary theodicy, rejects the "means to an end" argument within the context of evolution. This argument typically suggests that the suffering and extinction seen throughout evolution are justified by the eventual development of complex life forms, such as humans. However, Southgate contends that such a perspective is deeply problematic ethically and theologically.
Southgate's theodicy emphasizes that every creature is valuable in its own right and should not merely be seen as instrumental to some future end. He believes that justifying evolutionary suffering by its outcomes diminishes the inherent value of the individuals who undergo that suffering. According to Southgate, this perspective fails to acknowledge the real and profound pain experienced by living beings throughout evolutionary history.
You can explore more detailed aspects of his arguments here.
What are some arguments for and against abiogenic petroleum production?
What arguments do legal feminists make against the legalization of prostitution?
What incidental arguments are cited against the hypothesis of abiogenic oil?
What are the arguments against the biogenic origin based on the Athabasca Oil Sands?