...article “On Being an Atheist”, McCloskey shares with us his arguments on why being an atheist is more comforting (if you will) than being a Christian. McCloskey believes that the three proofs (Cosmological, Teleological, and the argument from design) are not a basis for proving God’s existence. McCloskey discharges the proofs by saying in his article, “, theists do not come to believe in God as a result of reflecting on the proofs, but come to religion as a result of other reasons and factors.” (McCloskey, 62). Although there are many ways that one could come to believe in Gods existence, thinking cosmologically, I can’t help but to look at Gods splendor around me or think of the universe, and doubt that God does in fact exist. In “Approaching the Question of God’s existence, Foreman says, “There are certain effects we see in the universe that show God exists.” (Foreman). Foreman touches on the fact that there is no one argument that proves one hundred percent that God exists. He goes on to share that these three arguments do have value, and when put altogether they all do prove to some degree that God does in fact exist. McCloskey attempts to break down each of the proofs to in a way persuade the reader on why these proofs are invalid. The first one he addresses is the cosmological argument. This proof or argument is the one that is most argued. First we must define a cosmological argument. A cosmological argument is an attempt to infer the existence of God from the existence...
Words: 1827 - Pages: 8
...The cosmological argument The word “cosmos” means universe. The cosmological argument argues the existence of a first cause, God, from a posteriori and priori premise. It argues that the universe is contingent and therefore requires a cause, as nothing is the cause of itself. This is known as redicto- ad- absurdum. The argument is backed up by the five ways put forward by the 12th century theologian and philosopher, St Thomas Aquinas. In the 12th century, St Thomas Aquinas put forward 5 ways to prove the existence of God in his book “Summa Theologica”. Aquinas’s five ways to prove the existence of God are based on the work of Greek philosophers, Plato and Aristotle, whose work was later translated in Arabic, by Muslim philosophers Al- Kindi and Al- Ghazali, and then translated into Latin. I will be examining three of Aquinas’ ways, uncaused cause, unmoved mover and necessary being. As well as examining these three ways to prove the existence of God, I will be looking at their supporters and critics. Aquinas’ 1st way to prove the existence of God was the uncaused cause also known as the first cause. Aquinas considers the world in terms of “cause and effect” which means that without a cause there is no effect. Everything in the universe has a cause. Human beings have a cause (their parents) too. Aquinas argued that we could follow the chain of “cause and effect” all the way back, but there cannot be an infinite chain. There must be an uncaused cause, which causes everything...
Words: 1140 - Pages: 5
...better belief system based upon his refutation of the theistic arguments. He argues against the existence of God by attempting to refute the cosmological and teleological arguments; as well he endeavours to discredit a God based upon the presence of evil. In doing this, he extends the boundaries for arguing God, whilst opening the floor to debate free will and the apparent comfort of the atheistic belief system. However, through careful analysis of the arguments for God, and an insight into the mysterious free will that God has given man; we see that a theistic belief is logically more sound and preferred. McCloskey says that the proofs for the argument of God cannot definitively establish a case for the existence of God. Therefore, all those proofs for God cannot be used in the logical argument for a God. However, McCloskey didn’t recognize the three aspects when approaching the question: does God exist. Through these three studies, we are shown that though no one person can empirically prove the existence of God, He in fact still exists (Foreman, Lesson 18). The three aspects to approaching the question of God are: best explanations approach, cumulative case approach, and the minimalistic concept of God. The best explanations aspect refers to the existence of God as the best way of explaining the effects that we can empirically observe within our universe. The cumulative case view tells us that no one argument can get us to the existence of the God of Christianity. Finally...
Words: 1875 - Pages: 8
...explanation of the world than theism, and the very existence of God must be dismissed. He believes this because of the presence of evil in the world and states that without definitive “proofs” God therefore cannot exist. McCloskey refers to arguments for God’s existence as “proofs.” I believe that McCloskey stresses this word to much. The term “proof” comes from the field of mathematics and it implicates certainty. For example 5 + 2 = 7 and 2 + 5 = 7 is a math formula that can be proved. It is a formula that can be proven according to the addition property of mathematics. The reality of God is not that simple. One should not look to prove his existence, but one should look to present the ideal that God is the best explanation for the world and life itself. A theist could do this by overlapping multiple ideas and together there is enough strength to present an argument for God being the best explanation for the world. McCloskey presents the following on the cosmological argument: He claims that “the mere existence of the world constitutes no reason for believing in such a being” (McCloskey, H.J., 1968, pg. 51). C. Stephen Evans and R. Zachary Manis present a non-temporal form of the cosmological argument. Their argument can be broken down into three key elements: “(1) Some contingent beings exist. (2) If any contingent beings exist, then a necessary being must exist (because contingent beings require...
Words: 1838 - Pages: 8
