...inconsistent with theism. Rather, the problem is evidential. A statement reporting the observations and testimony upon which our knowledge about pain and pleasure is based bears a certain significant negative evidential relation to theism.' And because of this, we have a prima facie good epistemic reason to reject theism-that is, a reason that is sufficient for rejecting theism unless overridden by other reasons for not rejecting theism. By "theism" I mean the following statement: There exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect person who created the Universe. I will use the word "God" as a title rather than as a proper name, and I will stipulate that necessary and sufficient conditions for bearing this title are that one be an omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect person who created the Universe. Given this (probably technical) use of the term "God," theism is the statement that God exists. Some philosophers believe that the evils we find in the world create an evidential problem for theists because theism fails to explain these evils (or most of what we know about them). (See, for example, (Hare 1968).) This position is attractive. It seems to reflect NOUS 23 (1989) 331-350 ? 1989 by Nouis Publications 331 332 NOUS the intuitions of a great many people who have regarded evil as an epistemic problem for theists. After all, the most common way of stating the problem of evil is to ask a why-question like "if God exists, then why is there so much evil in the world...
Words: 9076 - Pages: 37
...sponse Response Paper Stephanie Brockman PHIL 201 McCloskey Responses Introduction H. J. McCloskey gets most of his strong statements against the belief by asking the atheist to provide sufficient proof that God exists. However, McCloskey is not the only person who is unsure and asks questions God’s existence based on personal beliefs or influence. From the beginning many people have had questions about God and his existence. He wrote numerous books on atheism between 1960 and 1980 including the famous book, God and Evil. This paper evaluates the credibility of McCloskey’s article “On being an Atheist”. One of the McCloskey’s core arguments against theism is his demand for any proof that ascertains theists’ beliefs on God’s existence. He believed that atheism is more comforting than theism because most Christians do not believe in God because of proof but because of certain reasons and factors, he is looking for more solid evidence in God’s existence. However, there are several reasons why a person should believe in the existence of God. Firstly, theists believe that God is the creator of all things and of nature. Therefore, God is the creator of all things in existence and that affect both the atheists and theists are affected by this. The Bible also states, that Koran and other religious literatures all communicate the existence of a high power with some similar characteristics. These writings have been in existence for several years without any alteration of which...
Words: 1660 - Pages: 7
...Paper McCloskey Article In his article, On Being an Atheist, H.J. McCloskey attempted to prove how that holding an atheistic pattern of thought was much easier than holding a theistic worldview. McCloskey even referred to theism as a “comfortless spine-chilling doctrine.” Since McCloskey stated that proofs do not hold a vital role in the belief of God. I would question what would play a role in the belief of God for McCloskey. Since he believes that theists come to the belief of God based on other reasons and factors rather than just believing in God for a basis of our religious beliefs, then where does the Christian philosopher fit in? As a theist we are to move away from the point of proving Gods existence and rather explain why we hold to the theist view. Relating to Forman’s presentation, the best explanation approach is the best possible way to combat this view that the proofs should be abandoned. Although we may not be able to fully establish the case for the existence of God, we are able to give reasons to believe in the God of the Universe. The amount of proof that is necessary for McCloskey to form a belief of atheism, should be examined because like theism, it can not be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. The explanation of the beliefs of theism is most likely the best explanation as to why a God exists. Although there is many explanations as to Gods existence, the best way to combat the proof aspect of forming a belief is to simply offer the best explanation. On...
Words: 1687 - Pages: 7
...inform other atheists of the supposed inadequacies of theists' belief in God, and to address accusations that the position of atheism is "cold" and "comfortless".[1] The author intends to show that in fact, it is theism that is the cold and comfortless position to hold. Mr. McCloskey is undoubtedly an intelligent and thoughtful man. His article was written in an easy to understand syntax, and was surely embraced by many that hold a similar position. In fact, I think that any Christian would find it easy to wholeheartedly agree with Mr. McCloskey. Atheism is a much better alternative than serving the kind of god he describes in his paper! While McCloskey's arguments sound good, his portrayal of a vengeful, vindictive and manipulating god seems foreign to a discerning Christian. Upon reading his article, one questions the depth of the author's research on the God of the Bible at all. It seems almost as if his only understanding of Him comes from the obviously uninformed theists he quotes in his article. One gets the impression that all theists are either dim-witted or gluttons for punishment, maybe even a little of both! McCloskey attempts to refute three well-known arguments for God’s existence. McCloskey’s arguments in most cases focus in the problem of evil. In his attempt to refute the cosmological argument, McCloskey makes the claim that when a theist uses this argument, he has not “thought far enough nor hard enough about the problem of an uncaused cause."[2]...
Words: 1830 - Pages: 8
...Reply Paper to H.J. McCloskey’s Essay: On Being An Atheist H.J McCloskey makes many bold statements in opposition to the most common arguments for theism. To say the least, his bias shows through, even to the point of not seeing the deeper picture. He makes claims against the cosmological and teleological arguments. He then makes a point on how evil speaks against the existence of God. He then concludes with a statement that may or may not be supported by these statements (McCloskey, 1968). The Cosmological Argument McCloskey makes some statements about the necessity of a being that created the universe. He also makes some points about how this being cannot be perfect The Necessarily Existent Being It is amazing how people will require one set of standards for themselves, yet another set of standards for others. This is exemplified in the paper that is presented by H.J McCloskey. He States that proof is required for belief in a god (McCloskey, 1968, p. 51). But he also wants to believe in an origin of the universe in which a bunch of something without origin explodes to create hundreds of thousands of galaxies. Mr. McCloskey wishes to say that one must have proof before they believe. What Mr. McCloskey is not saying is that it would take proof to convince him not to believe in the manner he does. Mr. McCloskey has a belief system which serves his purposes. He has chosen a system that does not have enough solid defeaters to pull it apart. This allows Mr. McCloskey to settle...
Words: 2451 - Pages: 10
...The main two types of evil that are traditionally recognized are moral evil and natural evil. There is a clear distinction between the two of them. Natural evil is based around disasters such as hurricanes and tsunamis as well as people suffering. Where as moral evil is more based around the actions of people and their free will. For instance this could include murder and traits such as dishonesty and greed. However some of these in actual fact do link together and the separation between them is not quite as evident as originally thought. For example diseases which are natural evil could just be the result of an irresponsible lifestyle and natural disasters could be because of the way we treat our planet. Devastating incidents taking place in the world today have an effect on all of us.In particular those incidents by natural causes, not only leave us asking questions, but for some religious people leave a challenge to their faith called the problem of evil. The basic premises of the problem of evil are that how can an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God let his creation suffer without fixing the impurities. This argument frequently occurs when somebody is either attempting to disprove the existence of God and if not prove that the God some people believe in is definitely not worth worshiping. This theory is precisely for believers in the God of classical theism as that is the God who supposedly has the two qualities listed above. The reason that this does not pose a problem...
Words: 656 - Pages: 3
...with the existence of evil? The existence of evil is a seemingly irrefutable fact of life, one which Davies considers to be “the most discussed topic in the philosophy of religion.”1 This presents the theist with a dilemma, forcing them to make attempts at reconciling the existence of an omniscient, omnipotent and wholly good God with that of evil. Kreefy stresses the extent that this ‘problem of evil’ challenges theism, going so far as to claim that “more people have abandoned their faith because of this problem than for any other reason.”2 In the course of this essay, I intend to show that the existence of evil gives one sufficient cause to doubt traditional theism; and that one is rationally justified in doing so. In order to achieve this end, I shall identify the problem of evil, evaluating some of the major defences and theodicies proposed by theists and ultimately demonstrating that such attempts at accounting for the existence of evil are neither adequate nor convincing. The problem of evil is presented in two distinct modes; these being the logical argument from evil and its evidential counterpart. The logical problem of evil stems from the “contradiction involved in the fact of evil, on the one hand, and the belief in the omnipotence and perfection of God on the other.”3 At first glance, this contradiction is merely implicit, being made explicit through the presupposition that if God were a wholly good being, then He would desire to destroy evil insofar that “a good...
Words: 2152 - Pages: 9
...Introduction – What is God? God is considered as someone who created the entire universe and the one with the highest level of power. The idea of God is perceived differently in various religions. Starting from the name to the identity and attributes, everything is distinct and separate according to the basic rules of every religion and cultural norms. Primarily people assume that God doesn’t have any particular shape or cannot be depicted in any kind of visual form, but still in some religion people use the male gender to represent God. God has created every single living creatures and he is the one who knows everything and has full authority on what happens in the world and in everyone’s lives. He is someone who is worshipped by his devotees and the way he is worshipped or the way people believe in his existence is subject to the particular religion that one follows. Over the years, many philosophers have tried to contribute their ideas to come up with the most appropriate definition of God and to justify the relation between God and this world. In this report, those conceptions are going to be discussed and finally comments and arguments will be made regarding one specific conception, which will be deemed better or most agreeable compared to the other provided conceptions or arguments. Religious Conceptions of God In order to classify people based on their belief, religions have been divided into 2 major groups. * Theistic * Atheistic Theistic group of people...
Words: 1929 - Pages: 8
...to inform other atheists of the supposed inadequacies of theists' belief in God, and to address accusations that the position of atheism is "cold" and "comfortless”. The author intends to show that in fact, it is theism that is the cold and comfortless position to hold. Mr. McCloskey is undoubtedly an intelligent and thoughtful man. His article was written in an easy to understand syntax, and was surely embraced by many that hold a similar position. In fact, I think that any Christian would find it easy to wholeheartedly agree with Mr. McCloskey. Atheism is a much better alternative than serving the kind of god he describes in his paper! While McCloskey's arguments sound good, his portrayal of a vengeful, vindictive and manipulating god seems foreign to a discerning Christian. Upon reading his article, one questions the depth of the author's research on the God of the Bible at all. It seems almost as if his only understanding of Him comes from the obviously uninformed theists he quotes in his article. One gets the impression that all theists are either dim-witted or gluttons for punishment, maybe even a little of both! McCloskey attempts to refute three well-known arguments for God’s existence. McCloskey’s arguments in most cases focus in the problem of evil. In his attempt to refute the cosmological argument, McCloskey makes the claim that when a theist uses this argument, he has not “thought far enough nor hard enough about the problem of an uncaused cause." It is...
Words: 1827 - Pages: 8
...that call themselves Anti-theists. Anti-theists promote an ideology that denies the existence of God, any god, and that all religion is evil and not good for us. In this paper the anti-theist worldview will be examined to understand the worldview, its key attributes and why one might be so inclined to pursue such an ideology. The worldview will be compared to the Christian worldview, the purpose of which will be to refute the arguments of the anti-theists worldview and provide a basis for which the anti-theist can be presented with information that might enable them to have a change of heart/mind and begin their journey to acknowledging Christ with the hope of ultimately receiving him. Significant Elements of the Anti-Theist Worldview What is Anti-Theism? Anti (against) -theism is quite simply the opposition to theism, specifically to God or to a god. It is not just the opposition to the Christian God, the Creator, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, no, anti-theism is opposition to any god, religion or spiritual authority. Anti-theists have “an active distaste for religion in its various forms and believe, to one degree or another, that religion, all religion, is a bad thing”. [1] Joshua Kelly, in Oh, Your God, affirms this when he states that “the idea of god when put into practice as it is done today is inherently evil, breeds conflict, and causes...
Words: 4852 - Pages: 20
...Evil poses a problem for classical theism on logical as well as evidential grounds. Classical theism states that God is omnipotent, omnibenevolent, as well as omniscient. However, if evil exists, can these attributes to God remain true? The coexistence of God and evil is a question that many philosophers have speculated and attempted to explain either through logic or evidence. Ancient Greek Philosopher, Epicurus, delineated the logical problem of evil in a clearly structured form in the third century BC. Epicurus’ breakdown of the logical problem of evil, which was sustained for almost two and a half millennia, suggests that there is no God who can be all powerful as well as all good . The basis of this argument proposed that, “the existence...
Words: 772 - Pages: 4
...It was not without God’s power to create a world containing moral good without creating one containing moral evil. 3. God created a world containing moral good. 4. Therefore, God created a world containing moral evil. 5. Therefore, evil exists. How does faith inform how we view evil? There are two approaches that can explain faith and how we view evil. Nash asserts there is moral evil and natural evil and both are found in deductive and inductive forms. The deductive form tends to cause from a Christian point of view, Christians are said to believe a set of propositions that are internally self-contradictory. (Nash, 180). Nash explores Mackey claim “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.” (Nash,...
Words: 559 - Pages: 3
...as: 1. The Nature of and mode of God’s foreknowledge 2. The Nature of Divine Sovereignty 3. The Nature of Human Freedom Divine Foreknowledge: Four Views is a necessary and timely book. Although, church history bears witness to a diversity of opinions regarding the nature and content of God’s divine foreknowledge, the need for careful and scholarly examination remains as relevant and important as any point in church history. An encroaching, imperious secularism demands that we are able to cogently articulate our understanding of the divine as well as counter those objections proffered by those hostile to the historic, orthodox Christian faith. All four views will be examined and summarized. They include: 1. The Open Theism View 2. The Simple Foreknowledge View 3. The Middle Knowledge View 4. The Augustinian-Calvinist View...
Words: 3167 - Pages: 13
...solutions to this problem. The concept of evil and suffering is generally seen as a serious problem for religious believers. Evil and suffering can be seen to pose strong challenges against the existence of a God, more specifically an omnipotent and omnibenevolent God. Whilst John Hick describes evil and suffering as “physical pain, mental suffering and moral wickedness”, the problem is widely seen to refer to the existence of both natural evil, such as natural disasters, and moral evil, heartless actions such as murder, along with the suffering that is often a result of these. Perhaps one of the most significant aspects of the problem of suffering, the issue suggests that only two of the three features of the God of classical theism can be possible. If God is omniscient, he is all knowing and is knowledgeable of the suffering that exists. If God is omnipotent, then he must have the power to stop this suffering, and if he is an omnibenevolent, all-loving God, he must wish to stop this suffering. The existence of suffering suggests that God cannot be omniscient and omnipotent and still be omnibenevolent in agreement. As David Hume describes, God must be either malevolent or powerless for the other two features to remain applicable. Aquinas also argued this case, but referred to the idea that “the name of God means that He is infinite goodness”, which signifies that a God that did not meet the particulars of the God of classical theism is not viable. However, Aquinas’ argument...
Words: 1478 - Pages: 6
...Journal for Philosophy of Religion, “Stephen Wykstra and others have said that we should be skeptical about our ability to discern God’s reasons for allowing evil; since God’s knowledge is vastly superior to ours, we should not expect to understand why God allows the suffering we see. This approach is sometimes dubbed “skeptical theism.”” This is a different subsidiary of the “traditional theism”, which Stephen Maitzen, another published journalist for the International Journal for Philosophy of Religion, puts traditional theism into his own words, “According to traditional theism, the answer must be that our universe is in some sense better, or at least no worse, if God permits David’s immolation than it would be if God prevented it. In other words, God’s permitting David to suffer must achieve some compensating good (or prevent some evil at least as bad) that not even God could achieve (or prevent) otherwise.” Maitzen continues to elaborate on David’s suffering acknowledging that no amount of compensation or justification could offset the horrors that were experienced by David. However, Maitzen reiterated that to regular human beings that are not omnipotent and omniscient, in comparison to God, could not think of any compensation or justification to our knowledge, “According to recent versions of the empirical argument from evil, the best explanation of our inability to find an adequate moral justification for God’s permitting David to suffer is that no such justification exists;...
Words: 1111 - Pages: 5
