makes of the design argument that are described in this chapter, Hume presents a third. He says that even if the design argument succeeds in showing that a designer made the universe (or the organisms in it), the argument does not succeed in establishing what characteristics that designer has. For this reason, the argument does not show that God exists. Is Hume’s claim correct? How seriously does this undermine the design argument? I think that Hume’s claim that the design argument does not succeed
Atheist, is trying to show the readers are more reasonable and comfortable belief than that of Christianity. In the article he also puts up an argument concerning two theistic point of which is the cosmological and teleological argument. McCloskey also talks about the problems resulting from all the evil in the world. He goes as far to point out this evil in a world the God had made and blames God for it. Due to that fact and other issues, he believes that it is irrational to live by faith. According
in a world where evil exists, it is logically impossible and that is what created the problem of evil. Problem of Evil: There are two sides of the problem of evil which are the logical and evidential arguments. The logical side states that as long as evil and suffering exists in this world there is no God. That does not only contradict with the idea of God being “all-good”, but also him being “all-knowing” and “all-powerful” as well. Because, if God only desires good, then how evil was formed unless
Atheist, H.J. McCloskey tried to show that atheism is a more reasonable and comfortable belief than that of Christianity. McCloskey argued against the three theistic proofs, which are the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the argument from design. He pointed out the existence of evil in the world that God made. He also pointed out that it is irrational to live by faith. According to McCloskey, proofs do not necessarily play a vital role in the belief of God. Page 62 of the article
that if evil exists then so does God, and vice versa. It is also a common belief that this perfect being is the creator of everything and everyone. From atom to atom and from molecule to molecule, he designed all of it. It is also believed that this God has no flaws and is indeed a perfect being. However, some people will tend to disagree. Ernest Nagel, an American philosopher, proposed a series of counterarguments to many classic arguments on behalf of God’s existence. He dismisses arguments such as
vocabulary and texts followed by the people. The religious philosophy and philosophy of religion are very different from each other, in philosophy of religion we discuss the questions regarding the nature of religion as a whole rather than seeking the problems brought by a particular religious system. In philosophy of religion we discuss the question like IS THERE A GOD?. but this is not the only question we focus on, we also look at the aspect that if there is, then what is he like, and what does that
to talk about which which are the problem of evil, the fine tuning argument and the moral argument. According to theism, God is: “that being which no greater is possible, and he is omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent.”. By having a God who only desires good, and us living in a world where evil exists, it is logically impossible and that is what created the problem of evil. There are two sides of the problem of evil which are the logical and evidential argument. The logical side states that:
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. Your assignment is to read his short article, attached above, and respond to each of the questions below. The basis for your answers
God’s existence has been challenged by many philosophers and non-philosophers alike. Arguments that have been used to support the existence of a divine being includes the cosmological argument and the theological argument. However there are some who oppose these arguments and philosopher H.J. McCloskey is among this group. In the article “On Being an Atheist” written by H.J. McCloskey, he argues that both these arguments are false and insufficient as it relates to “proof” of God’s existence. McCloskey
Atheist, H.J. McCloskey tried to show that atheism is a more reasonable and comfortable belief than that of Christianity. McCloskey argued against the three theistic proofs, which are the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the argument from design. He pointed out the existence of evil in the world that God made. He also pointed out that it is irrational to live by faith. In my response, I will argue that McCloskey’s article is one-sided and thus flawed in his conclusion that atheism