Response Paper on H.J. McCloskey article On being an atheist
Name
Course
Date
During the year 1968, an atheist philosopher H.J. McCloskey came up with a powerful argument about how being an atheist was greater than the theistic way of life. Through this article, McCloskey finds a way to condemn numerous arguments which theist consider as true and in most cases seem to mock and impeach the believers of God. Some of the arguments that McCloskey tries to diminish are the three mutual proofs that most theists depend upon for their belief in God. The proofs include; cosmological proof, teleological proof and the argument from design. McCloskey also talks about the complications of evil and how its presence rejects the truth about God. At the end of the article, he maintains that atheism is heartening, meaning that it is more calming than theism. Below are a detailed discussion and validity of the truth about the three claims that McCloskey wants to rebate in the article and finally dispute the problem of evil to censure the thought that atheism is cool and comforting1.
McCloskey mostly insults the theistic opinion as one of ignorance and ambiguity. Referring to the believers of God, he say ‘’they do not think hard enough nor far enough about the difficulty of an uncaused reason, who has to be a unavoidably existing being to prove that the argument is far less conclusive than it appears to be at first sight. In addition, his reference of theists as being ignorant is clearly
Brown, Neil. "The New Atheism and The Existence of God.” Compass, 46, no. 3, 2-5. Kensington, Australia: Compass, Spring 2012.
Therefore, since the theist is justified in his belief in a wholly good, omnipotent, omnipresent being then the
In this paper, I will argue against the problem of evil, and I will give an adequate amount of information to prove why I believe Rowe’s Problem of Evil argument is not cogent, because although it is strong, all the premises are not true. This paper will also include me explaining, discussing, and evaluating Rowe’s Problem of Evil argument. In the argument, he discusses logical reasonings about why there is a strong argument for why atheism is true.
Having completed the unit of philosophy of religion, you are now ready to respond to an article written by an actual atheist. This article, titled “On Being an Atheist,” was written by H. J. McCloskey in 1968 for the journal Question. McCloskey is an Australian philosopher who wrote a number of atheistic works in the 1960s and 70s including the book God and Evil (Nijhoff, 1974). In this article, McCloskey is both critical of the classical arguments for God’s existence and offers the problem of evil as a reason why one should not believe in God.
In the article “ On Being an Atheist,” H.J. McCloskey attempts to inform his readers that the belief in atheism is a “much more comfortable belief” by effectively using a disdainful rhetoric towards theists and their faith. McCloskey delves into both the Cosmological and Teleological arguments, which within he criticizes the arguments and to further his argument against theism, he also presents the Problem of Evil and why evil cannot possibly exist with a perfect God being the creator of universe. What will be displayed in this essay are the counter-arguments to McCloskey’s criticisms and the attempt to discredit his claims that regard the “comfortable” position that lies within atheism and its arguments.
This essay features the discussion of the problem of evil in relation to the existence of god. Specifically outlining two sections where the problem of evil is discussed from atheist and theistic viewpoint.
People in our society today who have the atheist point of view on religion, which is the belief that there is no god, are going against the so-called norms of society, and therefor are seen as deviant. Deviance is just an idea. Society determines what is deviant by the ideas they hold of what should be the norm. Atheism is seen as a negative deviance, or below the norm. They have a status that is placed on them in society. It doesn’t necessarily mean that they believe in evil, although that is how it is sometimes viewed from people in society who have a specific religion or faith. Atheism, which is not a new idea, has been evolving in our society, and is the reason for problems leading to debate and court cases, and for
In addition, the argument succeeds in showing that even though atheist believes that God does not exist because he allows evil and suffering. The theist response to the problem of evil makes one understand that God gives one the power of free will to make decision on their own, he allows people to exercise their free will. The free will illustrates that God allows evil for the sake of human free will. The concept implies that an omnipotent God does not assert its power to intervene in choice. Evil occurs because God does not want to compromise this free will be preventing evil. He could not eliminate evil and suffering without eliminating the greater good of having created beings with free will.
God? A Debate Between a Christian and an Atheist The existence or otherwise of God has attracted a seeming countless debates from all classes of people mainly academics, comprising theologians, scientists and philosophers, not to mention laypersons. Consequently, this singular topic has generated many publications and reviews. Of particular interest are the two opposing views brilliantly presented by William Lane Craig, a popular Christian philosopher and apologist who is Research Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology and Walter Sinnott-Armstrong, Professor of Philosophy at Dartmouth College. There had been intense rounds of debate on the subject, prominent among which were the one at Dartmouth in 1999 and another at Wooddale Church in 2000. William Lane Craig believes, and firmly too, that God exists while Walter Sinnott-Armstrong would always want to convince his listeners that He does not. These opposing views and more are taken up in the 2003 popular and unique book, God? A Debate Between a Christian and an Atheist. The uniqueness of the book, and in fact, its greatest strength can be found in the fact that it was co-authored by opponents, a christian and an atheist. What makes the book more interesting is that it represents the results of an actual debate, where each side not only presents its succinct and polite views but has the chance to actively respond to its opponent with some succinct theological and philosophical sophistication. While they arrive
The Canadian philosopher J.L. Schellenberg has recently put forward an argument for atheism based on the idea that God is supposed to be perfectly loving and so would not permit people to be deprived of awareness of his existence. If such a deity were to exist, then, he would do something to reveal his existence clearly to people, thereby causing them to become theists. Thus, the fact that there are so many non-theists in the world becomes good reason to deny the existence of God conceived of in the given way. I first raise objections to Schellenberg’s formulation of the argument and then suggest some improvements. My main improvement is to include among the divine attributes the property of strongly
The person I chose to interact with for this project was a high school student the same age as I, and a professed atheist. He had been taught from a young age that there is no God and had those beliefs affirmed by the public school system who took God out of education. “The existence of a God theoretically doesn’t make sense and it is not what I was raised to believe,” he states. He claims that he simply cannot fathom there being a God due to the amount of suffering in the world and the innocent people who must endure that suffering, the fact that a loving God could send people to hell and the belief that those who have faith in God are often times narrow-minded hypocrites.
This argument presents a contradiction by supposing that worldly evil and an all-knowing, all-powerful, and all-good God could not exist simultaneously. This brings forth a distressing decision: one is forced to either abandon any belief in God’s existence in favour of what they know to be a valid argument, or abandon a valid argument in favour of theistic beliefs. Thus the contradiction presents itself. In this paper I shall reject the argument from evil while attempting to outline a possible solution to the contradiction it presents. I shall stress, however, that I am merely supposing a possible solution to this logical contradiction, not arguing for the truthfulness of such a solution; an absence of contradiction does not imply truthfulness. With that being said, let us continue.
Regarding religion within philosophy, everything is up for debate and everything needs and has an argument proving the existence of a theistic God. According to many philosophers, it is crucial for sacred beliefs to be examined and backed up with evidence. This leads me to addressing the many arguments that philosophers have addressed to whether a theistic God even exists, along with forming my own personal opinions and arguments.In recent history, many of the studied arguments for the existence of God has been very controversial. Many Christians believe that there is a God through faith alone. Yet, numerous philosophers disagree with the existence of a theistic God and attribute that faith alone isn’t viable because by definition faith is unprovable. I find it important to acknowledge the objections and challenges as to why there is a theistic God! Over the course of this essay, I’m going to unfold what past philosophers have claimed concerning how to prove God's
The central problem of this paper that I am going to try to convince my atheist friend is that god existed. I will argue in favor of a higher being by first presenting and evaluating two argument that will be used to persuade my atheist friend. First I will explain Pascal’s argument. Second I will explain one of the arguments of Aquinas’s that is in favor of the existence of god. Then I am going to explain what’s the central difference between the two arguments is. I will conclude by stating whether I was successful in converting my atheist friend.
1. Examine the strengths and weaknesses of the argument for the existence of God based on religious experience. (18) 2. ‘The argument merely indicates the probability of God and this is of little value to a religious believer.’ Discuss. (12)