H. J Mccloskey Argument

The fine-tuning argument by Collins highlights a universe which has been perfectly created for suitable life and that the smallest miscalculation would have been unbearable to sustain life. According to the first premise, the reality of the fine-tuning is not improbable under theism, while premise two states, the fine-tuning is very improbable under the atheistic single-universe hypothesis. The conclusion is that fine-tuning data support robust evidence to support the design hypothesis over the atheistic singe-universe hypothesis. As already noted, most critics would reject the fine tuning-argument by making a compelling argument that there are likely many other big bang that we are probably unaware of and that it is highly probable the universe

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.

In the argument with McCloskey about using “proofs” to establish a case for Gods existence I would first agree with McCloskey that we should not use “proofs” for Gods existence since “proofs” cannot be a 100% proof of Gods existence. But there are two arguments that can help explain the existence of God. The first is the best explanation approach which is the best explanation for the things we witness. Another classical argument is cumulative case approach, in this approach we use more than one argument to make a case for Gods existence. Both of these approaches to the existence of God is easier to understand than just the “proof” argument. We must also understand the defeaters of the arguments and also that the God of the Bible is

One burning and enduring problem in philosophy to which we have given considerable examination is the question of the existence of God--the superlative being that philosophers have defined and dealt with for centuries. After reading the classic arguments of St. Anselm and St. Thomas Aquinas, the contentious assertions of Ernest Nagel, and the compelling eyewitness accounts of Julian of Norwich, I have been introduced to some of the most revered and referenced arguments for and against God's existence that have been put into text. All of them are well-thought and well-articulated arguments, but they have their holes. The question of God's true existence, therefore, is still not definitively answered and put to rest; the intensity of this

Brown, Neil. "The New Atheism and The Existence of God.” Compass, 46, no. 3, 2-5. Kensington, Australia: Compass, Spring 2012.

Dred Scott decision. Dred Scott moved North with his master and sues claiming that because he was in free territory, he was no longer a slave. The case goes to the Supreme Court and they rule in favor of Dred Scott’s master and the court says that not only is Dred Scott not free, but he cannot even bring a case to court. Many see this as the Federal Government backing the institution of slavery. The Dred Scott decision was a major win for the South and Pro-slavery citizens. This is an example of slaves having no rights. Eventually in 1861, war broke out between the Union(North) and the confederacy(South) when the confederacy attacked Fort Sumter. Each side had different ideas. The Union wanted to make all men free and the Confederacy wanted

Both Chris McCandless and Henry David Thoreau relate to the concept of transcendentalism. Transcendentalism’s main ideas revolve around the concepts of self-wisdom, nature, and social reform. Both McCandless and Thoreau embrace two of these three ideas, but they both also show individualism very strongly. People can see this when they read Into the Wild and Thoreau’s excerpts from Walden. By reading these passages, the reader can see similarities between the lives of McCandless and Thoreau.

In Zivotofsky v. Kerry the Supreme Court held that only the President has the power to formally recognize a foreign nation. Since the President only has the power to formally recognize foreign nations than S. 214(d) of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act infringes on the president’s power to withhold recognition for Jerusalem. The court looks at two questions the first being does the president have sole authority to recognize foreign nations and secondly if he has that power can Congress force the President and his Secretary of State to contradict themselves. The whole issue revolves around section 214(d) that states an American citizen born in Jerusalem can choose to put Israel as their birthplace. Justice Kennedy brought up the presidential

In 1984 the Republican Party re-nominated Ronald Reagan as president. This re-nomination caused citizens in Texas to protest, Gorge Lee Johnson being among these protestors. Johnson and other protestors marched down Dallas streets spray-painting building and damaging other pieces of property. At the end of the protest Johnson doused the American Flag with kerosene and lit the flag on fire. He was arrested and charged with the Texas flag desecration law, Johnson spent a year in prison and was fined $2,000. The dissenting opinion of this Court is with Johnson because no one will riot or take offence, Texas is implying that freedom of speech is more important to some people more than others, and because

Religion is constructed on faith and belief of an individual even though it is the individual choice to follow it or not. It has stirred a lot of debates for years; those who are trying to prove that God exists throughout history and follow to modern day. While, those who are atheist are trying to prove their point of God does not exist. There are still more and more theories and debate over the subject of religious view. It is a matter of theism versus atheism; new and old philosophers have joined the debate and all with different sides to another philosopher’s theory or view on the matter. In this paper, I will attempt to illustrate the reasons given by Louis Pojman of why religion is good or bad, as well as evaluating Bertrand Russell argument about religion. This can define the meaning of life and the creation of life as we know it. It can change views or switch sides for there is always another explanation to exactly what religion is all about and having a superior ruler that created all.

McCloskey in his article, "On Being An Atheist" claims that proofs or arguments which theists provide to support their belief “have no weight”. He speaks of this primarily in relation to the ontological argument, the argument which attempts to show that the very concept of God implies his reality. McCloskey believes that there is no point in debating on this particular proof because it has no bearing but the ontological argument serves as the very foundation for other arguments which supports and defends God’s existence. If not for the purpose of proving His existence, the ontological argument is still necessary because it distinguishes the characteristics of God whom we are defending. The first rule of philosophical discourse is clarity

In reading McCloskey’s article it’s obvious he is searching for definitive proof that God exists. He is unable to find proof and therefore comes to the conclusion that God must not exist. He believes that the existence of evil discredits arguments made in support of believing in God. There is not one single thing in this world that we can know definitively without looking at the evidence. You have to look at the whole picture. Just like in a criminal investigation, the crime scene investigators gather evidence they are not looking for just the bullets or just the body. They look and gather all the data before coming to any conclusions. We will discuss

In Atheism: The Case Against God, George H. Smith refutes arguments that many Theists use to try and prove God’s existence. One example of this is what he describes as “The Argument from Life.” This argument is often referred to as the fine-tuning argument as it argues that the Universe that humanity is a part of is so unlikely, it is as if it has been fine-tuned by a supernatural force. Although Smith argues against this claim using a variety of arguments, he is ultimately unsuccessful in refuting it because an intelligent designer is a better explanation for life than chance.

The arguments which question the validity of God's existence, have more than likely, persisted for over several centuries. However, amongst these arguments, questioning the existence of God, exist major arguments presented in the teleological and cosmological arguments. In “On Being an Atheist,” McCloskey (1968) sets out to reiterate his position as an atheist by offering counterarguments to specific theistic positions. Moreover, while contending his claim that the arguments which question the validity of the existence of God are fundamentally false and that without absolute proofs, people ought to dismiss the idea that there is an omniscient and omnipotent being. Likewise, he alleges that the major indicator of the non-existence

There have been many discussions on how the world has been created and whether there is a true designer of the universe or rather it happened through a big bang. H.J. McCloskey “on being an Atheist” argues throughout his article that theism is not a belief that is rational, but a is something that should not exist, just as God he believes does not. Throughout this paper will be the discussion of the Cosmological, teleological, design arguments, and how he refutes these arguments to invalidate the existence of God and theism.