From the beginning, the controversy regarding the existence of God has been hotly debated. Convincing arguments from atheists and theists have been heavily debated and discussed in order to provide sufficient proof of Gods existence or lack thereof, and in 1986 H.J. McCloskey put pen to paper and wrote the article “On Being an Atheist” in order to share his views. McCloskey claims that the classical theistic views for God’s existence are not logically reasonable, and further states that because evil exists in the world, the possibility of the existence of God is impossible.
The very foundation of McCloskey’s argument is in what he calls proofs. McCloskey believes that “theists do not come to believe in God as a result of reflecting on the proofs, but as a result of other reasons and factors” (McCloskey). There are, however, a number of reasons for the belief in God’s existence. The first being the best explanation approach. Theists believe the existence for God can be found in the divine creation of the world, the universe, and mankind itself. The miracle of conception and the birth of a baby. The placement of the sun, the moon, and the stars. The way in which life itself begins and ends. All of which reflect back to a divine, personal, intelligent being. Could an argument be made to counter this view? Sure, nothing is absolute, however when
…show more content…
God gave us free will to choose and make our own decisions. Free will is a gift from God where he has allowed man to be able to make decisions on his own. In most instances, from a small age you are told the difference between right and wrong, however, some people take free will for granted and make the determination that if I don’t get caught then it is ok. If God gave us free will and then told us what to with it then it wouldn’t actually be
Thomas Jefferson believed that expanding westward was the key to a healthy nation. Forty percent of the population lived in trans -Appalachian west. Most people had left their homes from the East for a economic opportunity.
In 1968 H.J. McCloskey wrote an article for the journal Question called “On Being an Atheist.” He presents three arguments for why his belief in atheism is more comforting than theism. He regards the arguments as “proofs” and intends to prove the inadequacy of each proof. By comparing the three proofs separately and then together he is able to provide different angles which enables new thoughts. While the proofs don’t stand strong by themselves the three together persuade the argument that there is a specific Creator, or Christian God. As a Naturalist struggles without explanation McCloskey struggles to comprehend the reason so many put their faith in someone they can’t fully understand. Through evaluating each proof thoroughly McCloskey is
Having completed the unit of philosophy of religion, you are now ready to respond to an article written by an actual atheist. This article, titled “On Being an Atheist,” was written 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.
HJ McCloskey is a proclaimed atheist. He presents lots of arguments including the belief of why there is no God. He also says that atheism is a more comfortable belief. He states that it is impossible for a higher power to create an imperfect world. McCloskey thinks that even if there was a maker than how can people be comforted by Him instead of blaming him for creating an imperfect world with evil and imperfections.
In some ways, it is refreshing to read H.J. McCloskey's article, "On Being an Atheist". Most people assume atheists are simple nihilists who do not subscribe to any sort of convictions or beliefs. The author's text, however, refutes this conventional viewpoint by producing several reasons for embracing atheism, many of which are studied and labored counterarguments to typical claims of theists. The most important part of this essay is found in its opening paragraphs, in which the author makes a very prudent point in explaining the fact that most theists do not require elaborate proofs or empirical evidence to substantiate their beliefs in a divinity. Those who do have not completely subscribed to faith, but to testaments of man's deductive prowess, which should not be confused with faith. However, the author makes a number of points that he believes alludes to fallacies in theism that those well versed in theism can handily refute.
Upon reading H.J. McCloskey’s article “On Being an Atheist” it appears that McCloskey has quite the interesting yet sometimes understandable outlook on theism. In regards to “proofs”, McCloskey notes that there are three main arguments that defend God’s existence, which he calls “proofs.” These three arguments are the cosmological argument, the teleological argument, and the argument from design. (McCloskey, 1968) He tells of his beliefs in regards to these “proofs” and theism in general is seemingly ignorant and “miserable.” On several occasions McCloskey refers to these “proofs” as they unable to be established without a doubt as a proof should be; therefore, he believes that they should in turn be abandoned as false information. (McCloskey, 1968) Within Foreman’s presentation “Approaching the Question of
McCloskey in his article, "On Being An Atheist" claims that proofs or arguments which theists provide to support their belief “have no weight”. He speaks of this primarily in relation to the ontological argument, the argument which attempts to show that the very concept of God implies his reality. McCloskey believes that there is no point in debating on this particular proof because it has no bearing but the ontological argument serves as the very foundation for other arguments which supports and defends God’s existence. If not for the purpose of proving His existence, the ontological argument is still necessary because it distinguishes the characteristics of God whom we are defending. The first rule of philosophical discourse is clarity
In the articles, McCloskey believes he has the proof of being a Atheists is a much easier religion than that of Christianity. He believes that Atheism is a more functional form of beliefs and has a series of arguments to justify his points. He summarizes all of his “proofs” which conclude from his research that there is not enough evidence to support the existence of God. Within the article, McCloskey presents to the reader three different series of arguments in regards to why he is against Christianity. The arguments he sets before the reader are the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the argument of design. He also touches on the points about the problem of evil and how it can be interpreted [1.] McCloskey states “ that
The following is a response to H.J. McCloskey’s article, On Being an Atheist. This paper will argue against some of the main points that McCloskey presents, as well as showing strong evidence to refute the claims that God doesn’t exist. The following will challenge McCloskey’s cosmological and teleological arguments, and it will challenge McCloskey’s view that God cannot exist because evil is present in the world. The first argument that this paper will challenge, however, is McCloskey’s statement of theists trying to prove the case for God.
H. J. McCloskey, an atheist author, wrote an article titled “On Being an Atheist” which explains why he is an atheist, his views on God, and why He believes that being an atheist is more comfortable and reasonable than believing in Christianity. While arguing against the proofs within the cosmological argument and teleological argument, McCloskey does not acknowledge the ontological argument. He then goes on to say how belief in God is not necessary and “living by faith” is irrational. My goal of this paper is to examine his article, point out the flaws, and prove that his arguments do not prove atheism to be true.
Most religious zealots have no doubt about who created and the source of the origin of the universe. The same is true of the existence of the omnipotent, omniscience and omnipresent God. Although God may not be seen or heard or touched, however; by faith, we believe of his majestic existence. His existence as God cannot be measured in terms of Gallup surveys or scientific proofs to show otherwise but “religious thinkers” according to James and Stuart Rachels have offered numerous thesis for the for the existence of God, starting with the argument from design, with its subtitles such as the wonders of nature; the “best-explanation arguments and the same-evidenced argument” (Rachels). In either of the cases, the conclusions drawn were similar in the sense that the universe was created by an intelligent designer.
Response on McCloskey statement " Being an Atheist" In this world today, there are some who are still trying to figure out if God is real or not. This question is pose by H. J. McCloskey by asking what proof do we have of God existence and if there is a God why is there so much evil? In this paper it seeks to evaluate McCloskey statement that in his opinion it is best to be an atheist than a Christian.
In the Article “On Being an Atheist”, McCloskey refers to the arguments defending the existence of God as “proofs”. He also believes that because none of the arguments can absolutely prove the existence of God, that we should deny them all and the existence of God (McCloskey, 1968). Foreman addresses this dilemma in his presentation “Approaching the Question of God’s Existence.” Foreman states that there is no absolute proof of God’s existence but there are many things in the universe that are best explained by the existence of God. All arguments in the defense of the existence of
In this essay, I am going to argue that God exists. The three main concepts that I’m going 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:
In the article, “On Being an Atheist”, H.J. McCloskey discusses the reasons of why he believes being an atheist is a more acceptable than Christianity. McCloskey believes that atheism is a more rational belief versus having a God who allows people to suffer so he can have the glory. He believes to live in this world, you must be comfortable. The introduction of his article, he implements an overview of arguments given by the theist, which he introduces as proofs. He claims that the proofs do not create a rationalization to believe that God exists. He provides 3 theist proofs, which are Cosmological argument, teleological argument, and the argument of design. He also mentions the presence of evil in the world. He focuses on the existence