You must have Credits on your Balance to download this sample
Response to McCloskey's Article "On Being an Atheist"
Pages 6 (1506 words)
Response to McCloskey’s Article “On Being an Atheist” Introduction The philosophy of existence is arguably one of the most difficult, challenging and most widely contested branches of philosophy. No deep understanding of existence seems to provide absolute proof to all philosophers.
In this paper, a response is given to McCloskey by basin g the arguments to what has been covered in the philosophy of religion unit. McCloskey, in his article “On being an Atheist” presents a very strong counter argument against theist arguments about existence of a supreme perfect being referred to as God. According to him, theists hold on to arguments about existence of God as the fundamental proofs of his existence. The arguments do not certainly infer to proof of God’s existence nor do they provide a proof of why we exist. He actually claims that theists are sucked into the realms of religion not because of the basic proofs that exist but due to mere arguments. According to McCloskey’s line of argument, it is possible to argue that God certainly does not exist. The world is so imperfect to be the engineering work of a perfect being. In fact, we can only conclude that God, if he ever exists, is an evil God since there is more pain and suffering in the world than joy and happiness. Where is God when all the evil happens? Where was he not to control Hitler? Arguably, God may not exist if we take this line of thought. ...
Not exactly what you need?