In the mid-20th century, a renowned philosopher H.J. McCloskey wrote an attention-grabbing article called “On being and Atheist”. In McCloskey article, he argues on how the existences of God fails to be proven or sustained. The author argues that there is insufficient arguments to prove a theist belief while accrediting an atheistic point of view. The following essay is a response to McCloskey article from a different angle.
The Cumulative case that is presents in the article and argued against are the three theistic proofs: cosmological, teleological or design argument, and the argument of moral and evil. The first arguments is the existence of God claimed as the cosmological argument. The Teleological arguments is based on the intelligent …show more content…
The teleological argument, argues that there is some form of intelligence in which the universe has come to exist. The argument goes hand in hand with designs and the principle applies to the whole argument. The designs implies having a designer, and the world shows the marks of design, then the universe was designed by a designer. McCloskey elaborates that the argument of design does not provide enough facts and is insufficient in proving that there is an existence of a God. The teleological and design argument bot refer to an organized entity with a greater purpose, which theist deem as an intelligent designer. Another argument by McCloskey about the teleological argument is the lack of design examples are purpose cannot be found “…indisputable example of design and purpose are needed” (McCloskey, 64). However the argument to disapprove itself in the following statements made by the author. The article suggest the mere fact of evolution around the universe which would disregard a designer of the earth. However According to Evan “the evolutionary process, even if it is a mechanical process, is simply the means whereby God, the intelligent designer, realizes his purposes.” (Evan, 83) This implies that when God designed the world it made in a way it would continually evolve without the need of further
The Cumulative case that is presents in the article and argued against are the three theistic proofs: cosmological, teleological or design argument, and the argument of moral and evil. The first arguments is the existence of God claimed as the cosmological argument. The Teleological arguments is based on the intelligent …show more content…
The teleological argument, argues that there is some form of intelligence in which the universe has come to exist. The argument goes hand in hand with designs and the principle applies to the whole argument. The designs implies having a designer, and the world shows the marks of design, then the universe was designed by a designer. McCloskey elaborates that the argument of design does not provide enough facts and is insufficient in proving that there is an existence of a God. The teleological and design argument bot refer to an organized entity with a greater purpose, which theist deem as an intelligent designer. Another argument by McCloskey about the teleological argument is the lack of design examples are purpose cannot be found “…indisputable example of design and purpose are needed” (McCloskey, 64). However the argument to disapprove itself in the following statements made by the author. The article suggest the mere fact of evolution around the universe which would disregard a designer of the earth. However According to Evan “the evolutionary process, even if it is a mechanical process, is simply the means whereby God, the intelligent designer, realizes his purposes.” (Evan, 83) This implies that when God designed the world it made in a way it would continually evolve without the need of further