Another problem I found in his philosophy was, throughout his writing, McCloskey talks about how Christians use arguments as “proofs”; however, they are not proofs but merely ideas and arguments that when looked at as a whole, seem to give support to a claim. Since they do not definitively establish a case for God, McCloskey says these arguments should be abandoned. Again, McCloskey seems to think that he knows the inner mind of “most” theistic people and claims that we hold certain ideas or theories as proof. I know quite a few theists; however, I can’t recall ever hearing a single one saying that they have definitive proof of…
The 1970’s philosopher McCloskey brings into question the three major arguments that are commonly presented against the question of God’s existence. McCloskey does so in an article entitled “On Being an Atheist.” In this article McCloskey commonly refers to these arguments as “proofs” rather than simply arguments. Furthermore, he argues that these “proofs” can’t be positively established and therefore one should throw said “proofs” out. In terms of a theistic view on the question of God’s existence theist openly admit that there arguments could indeed be defeasible. Theists acknowledge that there is a possibility that a defeater can be presented to shut down the conclusion…
I will now take a look at the problem of evil which is most frequently used in the argument against theism. In H. J. McCloskey’s essay, God and Evil, he states the problem in this way, “Evil is a problem for the theist in that a contradiction is involved in the fact of evil on the one hand, and the belief in the omnipotence and perfection of God on the other. God cannot be both all-powerful and perfectly good if evil is real.” An argument can be formulated to disprove the existence of God in the following way:…
The teleological argument is one made for the existence of God. William Paley’s argument is based on the idea that the universe is too complicated to have been created by accident and so must have had a creator. This creator is assumed to be God, who has created the universe and all the parts in it serve a certain purpose. A close consideration of this argument will show that there are several problems with it.…
In February of 1968, H. J. McCloskey’s published an article called, “On Being an Atheist.” In this, he argues that atheism is a more comfortable, logical and realistic than theism. He mentions the evil that is in the world and how it doesn’t make any sense to find comfort in a God that purposely causes pain, disease and natural disasters. McCloskey also mentions it is unreasonable to live by faith in this world. In this article, he argues the three theistic proofs including, the argument for design, the teleological argument and the cosmological argument.…
In my opinion, I believe that McCloskey’s arguments against the existence of God is somewhat biased. By biased I’m inferring that his argument is a one-sided view that attempts to provide proof that God doesn’t exist based on man-made judgments about what an all-powerful, omniscient being can, should, or would do. I conclude that this is unreasonable because as mere humans, we don’t have the capability to understand the magnitude or reasoning of God. Who are we to determine what The Creator should do in any circumstance? That is not our position as humans to do this for God. Preoccupied with what an all-powerful…
In regards to how McCloskey presents his argument, the word “proof” is uniquely placed in an attempt to guide the reader through biased language. The argument that atheism is more reasonable and comfortable than theism is strictly opinionated. Many may view this stand in an opposite light using theistic theories to establish points. McCloskey does not present his arguments as theories, yet as fact; though there is no proof provided. Theistic theories accept that the argument cannot be proven one hundred percent for either side. McCloskey uses the belief in irrational faith to argue against a theists belief in God stating “ most theists do not come to believe in God as a basis for religious belief, but come to religion as a result of other reasons and factors (McCloskey, 1968).” A common view of this belief in today’s society is that individuals use religious beliefs as a crutch in difficult circumstances. It is important to recognize that there are some individuals that will fall into this category, yet…
In the first few paragraphs of his article, McCloskey does a little sleight of hand with his readers. He overstates the Theist’s case by referring to the proofs of God’s existence, and then feigns amazement at the fact that they actually don’t “prove” God’s existence. This sort of trick ought to be recognized by people familiar with philosophy of religion. The most common way Christian Apologists make the case for…
As I mentioned in the paragraph above, the existence of the world does prove that a being had to create the objects in our universe. I suppose in the reading McCloskey is right in that the mere proof of objects existence does not give us the right to claim an all-powerful, all perfect being created these objects. What I do believe is given this knowledge why would one not want to further educate yourself on this conclusion and open your eyes to the idea of “god”…
McCloskey makes the claim that he is reminding fellow atheist why they believe there is no God. He claims that the traditional proofs have no merit. I believe the sheer magnitude and complexity of the world we live in is strong evidence of an intelligent designer and creator. Only an intelligent creator could form a world where the air that we breathe is part of such a complex system. We also live in a world that has morals, which points to a morally perfect Being that we model our lives and society by. The Cosmological, Teleological and Moral arguments create a cumulative case for why God exist. God’s existence is not solely dependent on any one argument, rather an accumulation of several arguments. Although McCloskey tries to argue the Cosmological, Teleological and Moral arguments from the same point, they are intended to build upon each other.…
The Ontological Argument P| 1. Definition: God is that being than which no greater being can be conceived. P| 2. God exists in the mind (we think of God).…
One of the most interesting arguments for the Existence of God comes from Anselm and the Ontological argument. According to the Ontological argument, there is no reason to go out and look for physical evidence of God’s existence. The ontological argument is based completely on reason and comes from the concept of a “being than which no greater can be conceived.” Anselm suggested that if such a “being” does not truly exist then a greater being can be conceived. But how does this make any sense?…
Philosophy is a subject that can take many twists and turns before it finds an answer to a general question (Wippel, Wolter 335). God is real to many, but not real to others. Some believe that there is sufficient evidence such as the earth. The earth is the perfect size, if the earth and the atmosphere were any smaller, life on earth would be impossible. Then again, because of this idea some believe that the earth was created by a big explosion called the big bang theory which created our planet: because of this we will examine Aquinas on the existence of God while Kant will explore God’s non existence to the extent of being mortal.…
Once again Aquinas has written with the certainty that God has to exist in order…
In post-modern era, society is more inclined towards modern philosophy. This results in people to be composed of social construct and ideologies such as socialism, capitalism, feminism and progressivism. Thus, the causality of fragmentation in a Western society are due to the clash of conflicting ideologies. In order to counteract the ideology, one must argue the existence of God. It is a common reality which one can presuppose that a being or thing provide existence into an objective reality. Therefore, the source of objective reality can be validated through these following arguments; “Argument for Existence of God,”, “Argument for Time and Contingency,” and “The Ontological Argument”.…