Naturalism Vs. Theism: Sean Carroll And William Lane Craig

Theism is the belief of the existence of god as the creator of the world. Atheism, on the flip side, disagree with the argument of believing in a god as in their view there aren’t enough evidence that God actually exist. While scientists disagree with the existence of God, however, they have not been able to disproved that god does not exist. In a sense, it’s worth pointing out that both argument somehow aiming in the direction of strictly scientific view of the world. The reason for my logic is that theism utilized faith to explain everything around them which in their view are more than enough indication in explaining the existence of god. While this logic may be insufficient from atheism point of view; however, it is worth noting that the

John Steinbeck 's novel Of Mice and Men is a famous Naturalist work in American literature. Various elements of Naturalism is exhibited in this novel through its character types and story plot. Charles Darwin, an English Naturalist proposed a theory called natural selection, meaning that nature selects the best adapted varieties to survive and reproduce. Darwin also identified this theory as survival of the fittest. Steinbeck incorporated this belief of natural selection in many instances throughout Of Mice and Men using characters and their circumstances. One character named Candy has an injury and is old in age. They were leading factors in his fear of being unemployed. His dog’s old age and uselessness also resulted in its death.

Of the three theistic arguments presented by the text, I find the “design”, or the teleological argument to be the most persuasive because unlike the other two arguments (ontological and first cause), the argument’s premises can be supported through observations of the physical world. The ontological and first cause argument are both more based in pure logic and reasoning, and they also can both be easily challenged for the same reason. On the other hand, the design argument focuses less on how the existence of God could be explained in the terms of a “catalyst”, and more how there is a statistically improbable amount of order in our universe (called Maximally Orderly Huge Universe”). Put simply, the design argument states that since there

Naturalism is a literary movement that encapsulates the struggles of the common population. Hamlin Garland presents an excellent example of Naturalist literature in his short story “Under the Lion’s Paw”, published in 1889. In this short story, many of Dr. Stephen doCarmo’s characteristics of Naturalism are visible. Dr. doCarmo describes three broad characteristics of Naturalism: individuals are subjected to larger uncontainable forces, political undertones are prevalent within the work, and the subject matter of the work appeals to the middle-class. “Under the Lion’s Paw” possesses all three of these characteristics and radiates naturalism.

Within McCloskey’s article he refers to three well known theist arguments as proofs the cosmological, teleological and argument from design. The Cosmological argument

Upon reading H.J. McCloskey’s article “On Being an Atheist” it appears that McCloskey has quite the interesting yet sometimes understandable outlook on theism. In regards to “proofs”, McCloskey notes that there are three main arguments that defend God’s existence, which he calls “proofs.” These three arguments are the cosmological argument, the teleological argument, and the argument from design. (McCloskey, 1968) He tells of his beliefs in regards to these “proofs” and theism in general is seemingly ignorant and “miserable.” On several occasions McCloskey refers to these “proofs” as they unable to be established without a doubt as a proof should be; therefore, he believes that they should in turn be abandoned as false information. (McCloskey, 1968) Within Foreman’s presentation “Approaching the Question of

The existence of God as puzzled minds for many years. Philosophers have argued that god may or may not exist to the human mind or that there can be more than one type of god. Our ways of thinking have gradually expanded over the years and it has allowed us to make more complex ideas on lost history but there is still some questionable knowledge on whether there is a god or not. We as humans could be missing valid information to find the correct answer.  Cosmological argument refers to existence of a unique being, generally identified with or referred to as God, is deduced or inferred as highly probable from facts concerning causation, change, ect in the respect of the universe as a whole within in. My question lies, what put that there? It

Theories like the big bang or God creating the universe are good ideas of how the universe came to be, but both have holes in them. If god created the universe, then who created god? If the Universe was just a big empty void, how is it that big bang can even happen? "If they use the expression "God exists" at all, they understand it as referring obliquely to the speakers own feelings..." (pg 107). Same could be said to which theory a person chooses to believe

Over the centuries, there have been many attempts by religious philosophers to prove the existence of God. Though the history of the philosophy of religion has been dominated by attempts to prove the existence of God, there also exists a number of arguments that seek to disprove theism. In philosophy, it is important to be clear about the meanings of the terms that are central to the argument. Theism is the belief that there is a deity that is distinct from and transcends the world, which it creates and intervenes in. Atheism is the opposite of Theism which is the belief that there is no such thing as a deity. The arguments for the existence of God sets out to explain each of the common philosophical arguments for theism, and so to explore

A logical argument for God’s existence or nonexistence is the cosmological argument. William Craig says in his book that there are three statements that give the cosmological argument form. Craig concluded that whatever begins to exist has a cause. The Universe began to exist therefore the Universe had a cause. What that cause was, is widely challenged. The argument against the existence of God includes the Big Bang Theory. The Big Bang Model is a broadly accepted theory for the beginning and evolution of our universe. According to NASA, it claims that twelve to fourteen billion years ago, the part of the universe that can be seen today was only a few millimeters across. It has since expanded from this hot dense state into the vast and much cooler cosmos that is inhabited. Remnants of this hot dense matter as the now very cold cosmic microwave background radiation can be seen which still pervades the universe and is visible to microwave detectors as a uniform glow across the entire sky. Those who say that God does not exist use this as their argument to explain how the universe was created. Those who support this theory say that the universe resulted from a big bang and everything that is in existence came from this phenomenon. In talking about the Big Bang Theory, Jeffrey Keen said, “In general, science accepts that both the structure of the universe and the laws of physics were created simultaneously at the beginning of the Big Bang, and have since remained constant

Three reactions of the cosmological contention have been advertised. To start with, some say matter is everlasting and is not needing a "first cause." Second, some say if everything needs an answer, who is god?" Third, some say that regardless of the possibility that beyond any doubt some being created our universe to exist, this does not demonstrate the presence of the Christian God. All it shows is that there is some effective being that made the

In this paper I will discuss the Christian theistic worldview against the atheistic view that God is a myth and generated in the minds of people. There are many assumptions on both sides regarding the creation of the world, including but not limited to an actual “creator” who may be behind the scenes controlling the universe. A theistic worldview holds God as the supreme Creator whose character and will for his creation is revealed in the Scripture. Further, it is through the Scripture we find the biblical principles that answer life’s most challenging issues. In contrast, the atheistic worldview holds that “man” has the answers and explanation of our existence, which simply defines and confines the universe to matter and energy. Further, all answers to mankind can be resolved within the boundaries

When it comes to discussing the cosmological argument, I question myself why are most arguments that are for defending a higher being, in a monotheism perspective: the belief of one God. I argue that yes there is an existence of a higher being, but I also argue that there is more than one God; one God for each universe. I believe that there is a God for each universe, because there is more than one universe, therefore I argue towards the multiverse argument with a concentration of polytheism.

In Consider, the authors list Naturalism, Pantheism, and Theism as the three main primary classifications of worldview. From a Christian worldview perspective, the universe was created from a supernatural design and ruled by a monotheistic God. Other classifications of worldview discredits this design phases, and many feel as though the universe was conceived by an “impersonal force” (pantheists) or a scientific creation through evolution (naturalists). Secular humanists supports naturalism however believes God is a figment of human’s imagination and “that man is created good and thus can will himself to being better” (Hindson, 2008, p.47).

Naturalism is a philosophy which emphasizes “the effect of heredity and environment on human nature and action” (Zhang) and incorporates realism to “suggest that social conditions… and environment [have] inescapable force in shaping human character” (Zhang). Furthermore, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Natural Philosophy explains that to Naturalists, “reality is exhausted by nature, containing nothing ‘supernatural’, and that the scientific method should be used to investigate all areas of reality” (Papineau). Naturalism (in literature) is an idea that suggests everything about humanity is measurable, detectable, manipulatable, and traceable to a cause, and therefore the characters of Naturalist literature would be illustrated as simply the products of their environments; vessels devoid of spiritual guidance or fate that are subject only to their environments. An example of a Naturalistic novel is The House of Mirth by Edith Wharton; a novel set in late 19th century New York that follows Lily Bart: a young woman who was born rich but is slowly losing both her societal status and her money whilst she repeatedly avoids marriage, her only option to escape her fate: a life of poverty. With this in mind, The House of Mirth is an exemplary example of a Naturalistic novel because of its portrayal of characters as the product of their environments.