...Arvin D. Medlock Jr. PHIL 201-DO2 Professor R.D. Kuykendall 5 May 3, 2015 McCloskey Response Paper “On Being an Atheist” Does God Exist? That is the question we face! For many years Theists and Atheist have debated this question for many years along with their central views and beliefs that we as human being rely on as it relates to Life and God. The Point of views and debates center around the Cosmological Argument, the Teleological argument (argument from Design) and the most debated argument as it relates to this topic called the Problem with evil? When questioning wither or not God Exist these traditional arguments play significant roles in investigating and proving or discrediting someone’s view or stance on this specific Philosophical belief. As you read McCloskey article “On Being an Atheist” he argues the Theist stance who believe in the Existence of God from the perspective view of an Atheist. McCloskey in writing this Article is not trying to discredit their belief in the Existence of God, but to raise questions, doubts and uncertainties concerning their arguments on which they stand on to prove their belief by ultimately concluding that the Theist arguments are not valid and should be disregarded as evidence to prove their belief in the existence of God. The problem with McCloskey argument against the argument of Theistic View is the Theist argument is not to literally prove their belief concretely on the existence of God, but there view is design to give...
Words: 2421 - Pages: 10
...A Response to the Article: "On Being An Atheist" by H. J. McCloskey Joshua Cottrell PHIL 201-D32 Professor Pensgard August 12, 2013 The belief in a Creator and a literal God has been a subject of many arguments down through the centuries. Despite a written record and a large contingency of believers, there has arose a strong group of people who believe there is no God and that man just happens to exist and that there is nothing beyond this life. In 1968 H.J. McCloskey published an article entitled "On Being an Atheist". He argued that theories such as the Cosmological or Teleological arguments did nothing to prove in his mind the presence of God. He strongly believed that evil further cemented the idea that a righteous God did not exist. With his writing he attempted to empower the atheist and once and for all prove that God did not exist. I. "Proofs" McCloskey indentified theistic arguments for God as "proofs", and in so doing opened himself up to much scrutiny. He quotes a colleague as saying "...most theists do not come to believe in God by reflecting on the proofs, but to come to religion as a result of other reasons and factors." I do not believe that his colleague was referring necessarily to Cosmological or Teleological arguments as "proofs", as McCloskey ends of doing. I believe his associate was merely stating that most people do not come to religion because they see the sky and think there must be a Creator. There are a number of factor...
Words: 2242 - Pages: 9
...in doing so? The question of God’s very existence has been discussed throughout time. H.J. McCloskey, an atheist, expounds on this matter in his article “On Being an Atheist.” Of course this article is from the atheist point of view. McCloskey alleges that atheism is a more agreeable 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...
Words: 1838 - Pages: 8
...Response Paper McCloskey Article Liberty University Philosophy 201 Fall 2013 H.J. McCloskey (1968) in his article on being an Atheist aimed to prove atheism a more viable belief than the Christian worldview. McCloskey disputed the three theistic proofs: the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the argument from design. McCloskey called attention to the presence of evil in a world made by God. He went further saying that it was nonsensical to live by faith. McCloskey contended that proofs were not the reason that people have faith in God but rather people come to rely on religion because of other circumstances in life. In spite of this, the three arguments, show great validity in supporting the God of Christianity’s existence. Examining this from the cumulative case point, there is no for sure argument that supports the existence of God of Christianity but, placing all viewpoints together cumulatively, the case is quite formidable. The Cosmological argument contends that the creator of the universe, the cosmos, is God and God alone. The Teleological Argument expresses an intelligent creator and the argument of morality display how God is an interpersonal, morally flawless God. This supporting information gives some clarity of how the universe was created. According to McCloskey the Cosmological argument has many flaws because it is only based upon the world as we know it. From McCloskey’s perspective, just because the universe exists, doesn’t necessarily...
Words: 1458 - Pages: 6
...Response Paper McCloskey Article Anthony Powers PHIL 201- C09 November 6, 2015 Response 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...
Words: 1687 - Pages: 7
...Corey Rivera Dr. Matthew Arbo Phil 201-D20 December 7, 2013 Response Paper Does a belief in an all-knowing, all-good, all-perfect, and all-powerful God provide one with all the answers to life’s inexplicable questions? Conversely, does a belief in atheism offer any insight into life’s inexplicable questions? According to an article titled “On Being an Atheist,” written by the Australian philosopher H.J. McCloskey, atheism seems to do just that. In fact in his article, McCloskey not only bashes the classical arguments for God’s existence using the problem of evil, but also offers it as the reason why one should not hold to the belief in all-knowing, all-good, all-perfect, all-powerful God. However, as seen in the arguments against McCloskey’s beliefs in atheism, such a belief is not only a sin against God, but has devastating effects to all of mankind. McCloskey claims that arguments, named “proofs” in his article, offer no significant evidence to establish a case for an omnibenevolent God, and therefore should be disregarded.1 However, McCloskey is using the classical arguments the wrong way and in a manner they were not designed to be used. The problem with referring to the classical arguments for God’s existence as “proofs” implies a sense of certainty. These arguments were not meant to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of God, as McCloskey believes. Rather these arguments take a best explanation approach for the existence of God. They simply argue the best...
Words: 2208 - Pages: 9
...1 RESPONSE TO H.J. M CCLOSKEY’S “ON BEING AN ATHEIST” Tarnell Brown Student # L22657685 PHIL201_D44_200940 Sean Turchin Liberty University, December 14, 2009 Response_Paper_Tarnell_Brown.docx 2 It has long been the contention of the atheist that there are no good arguments for the existence of God. In his article “On Being an Atheist,” H.J. McCloskey seeks to nullify the classical arguments for God’s existence by contending that they are not rationally sound. He further holds that the existence of evil proves the impossibility of an omnipotent, all-good necessary being who has created the universe. This missive is an attempt to give refutation to Mr. McCloskey’s argument, also by means of reason and logic. It is the presupposition of the author that God does in fact exist, that He is a necessary being, and that the existence of evil in no way poses a problem to the logic of His existence. Mr. McCloskey essentially begins his argument by implying that the known arguments for the existence of a theistic God are made up of a series of proofs, none of which can be definitively proven. In fact, he is dismissive of such proofs, contending that “most 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.”1 While this statement is most likely true, it is erroneous to dismiss the theist’s belief on the basis of its origins. In doing so, McCloskey commits the fallacy of genetics. At...
Words: 3927 - Pages: 16
...Elder 1 Tonisha Elder Phil 201 Response to McCloskey article May 7, 2016 Elder 2 In McCloskey’s 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...
Words: 1827 - Pages: 8
...RESPONSE PAPER Catherine Cahill Philosophy 201: Philosophy and Contemporary Ideas August 8, 2012 Self-proclaimed atheist H.J. McClosky attempts to promote atheism as a superior belief to that of theism in his paper “On Being an Atheist”. McClosky begins his paper by referring to philosophical arguments for the existence of God as proofs. Right away there is a problem with this language and the usage of the word proof if one intends to argue with the majority of philosophers who present arguments for the existence of God or most standard arguments. The basic outline of a philosophical argument follows that an argument is either inductive or deductive. A deductive argument holds that the premise entails the conclusion and an inductive argument holds that a premise renders the conclusion likely to be true. Neither form claims to have empirical proof but only to convey validity and soundness of an argument to be accepted by one who is sane, rational and possesses...
Words: 2182 - Pages: 9
...Response Paper Mccloskey Article Clark Hernanser PHIL 201 February 24, 2013 Ramon Graces Response Paper Mccloskey Article In his article, On Being an 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 states that "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." However, he feels that as far as proofs serve theists, the three most commonly accepted are the cosmological, the teleological, and the argument from design. It is important to note that he considers these arguments as reasons to "move ordinary theists to their theism." (McCloskey 1968) This is not necessary the case and contradicts the former statement that most theists do not hold to these proofs. As such, the attempt to dispute these arguments as a reason not to believe in God is almost not worth attempting. If theists do not generally hold to these proofs as reasons for faith, then why bother trying to dispute...
Words: 2073 - Pages: 9
...Is the existence of God logically consistent 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...
Words: 2152 - Pages: 9
