Summary Of Mccloskey's On Being An Atheist

Decent Essays
In his work, On Being an Atheist, McCloskey attempted to show that atheism to hold more sense and facts compared to Christian beliefs. The large part of his work focused on arguing against the three major proofs that exist among most individuals in the universe today. Through his argument against theistic proofs that include cosmological argument, the argument from design and the teleological argument, McCloskey stated that it is irrational for any human being to live by faith. He goes on to deduce that the three agreements cannot prove or cannot be the basis to show that God exists. Proof helps in establishing a fact or the truth of a statement but according to McCloskey there is no proof that God exists, and thus, it should not play a vital …show more content…
According to McCloskey, this argument widely focuses on describing and justifying the universe as is known by all individuals today. According to the argument regarding the presence of God, there must exist a creator be it a being or a thing that made the world as we know it today. However, according to McCloskey there, the mere presence of the universe and everything in it is not reason enough to affirm that God exists. Despite the existence of a positive and strong correlation between the things that will come to be extant, things that live and exist and things that used to be extant, McCloskey does not believe that that something else like power, being or force plays any important part in their existence. On the contrary, Evans and Manis’ discussion, there are necessary beings and contingent beings that are responsible for setting forth in motion the ring of causality. Thus, the necessary beings must exist for the contingent beings to exist. As a result, God must exist for the world to exist concluding that he is the creator and the all-powerful, all-perfect and uncaused …show more content…
Although McCloskey does not define what is evil, he gives all kind of notion to explain what is evil. The theist explanation dies not prove why there is evil in the universe but rather offer possible justifications to account for all evil in the creation. From the arguments, it is easy to point out that the arguments they admit the presence of perfect God, but they cannot negate the possibility of all-perfect God allowing evil into the universe. The presences of evil help to magnify the good as well provide set standards to measure good. Thus, the presence of evil in the universe is the free will of human being.
The argument of free will gives a justification as to why there is so much evil in the world today. Considering that God gave humanity the right to choose the right and wrong, all the evil can be attributed to this freedom. If free will were not true, the laws, rewards, and punishments would eventually lose their purpose and meaning. Right and wrong create the necessity for an individual to understand the difference between them. Without the free will, people with good intentions would not have the freedom to choose what is best for them. Free will gives human being ultimate glory of making life

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Plantinga believes, like Mill, that human free will is the explanation as to why evil exists. However, in doing so, he does not belittle the powers of God, nor the good intentions. The Free Will Defense is used as an “effort to show that there may be a very different kind of good that God can’t bring about without permitting evil” [1;347]. This different kind of good is free will. God created humans with the will to choose the good in a battle between good and evil.…

    • 983 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Being free means that we have the choice to do evil things, a choice which some of us choose to exercise. This theodicy gains so many followers because it states that God does not create evil, yet evil can not be avoided without depriving us of our fundamental freedom of will. Moreover, the world without freedom would be an overall worse place. Through an examination of this explanation, it seems to preserve God 's goodness, because he created the best possible world. It also preserves his omnipotence and omniscience, because although he does know about evil and could stop it, the reason he chooses not to interfere is to ensure our freedom.…

    • 1336 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    McCloskey wrote a paper, “On Being an Atheist” in 1968. This paper was his way of trying to prove that there is no God. He compares a lot with atheist and theists ways of looking at how people believe in God and that he does not believe that there is a God with some of the ways that the world functions. An atheist is someone who does not believe, but he makes it seem like it is easier to be an atheist where he feels that theists are just miserable. He contends that theists really do not believe in the proofs, but turn to religion for other reasons.…

    • 1165 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    A theodicy is an argument that attempts to make evil compatible with God. Conceivably the most famous theodicy is the free will defence. It argues that evil is the product of our free will. God gave us free will, something that is very beneficial. It is better to have a universe that is free, than without.…

    • 747 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Swinburne offers a free will theodicy. Before explaining his theodicy it is important to note the two types of evil. Natural evil, which is caused by disease, unforeseeable accidents, and natural disasters. Then there is moral evil, caused by humans intentionally doing actions they should not be, or evil caused out of negligence. God offers free will, humans have the power of make significant choices between good and evil.…

    • 1073 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Descartes Existence Of God

    • 1454 Words
    • 6 Pages

    John Cottingham, in his book Descartes, affirms that "The problem is given special piquancy by Descartes ' own statement (...) that 'the certainty and truth of all knowledge depends on my knowledge of the true God ' ". This suggests that the knowledge of God should be axiomatic - but it isn 't. Although all the knowledge depends on the knowledge of true God, Descartes ' does not have, at the starting point, any knowledge of God. He shouldn 't be able to give forth any certain and truthful judgment, yet he claims to do so. Apparently, Descartes employs 'clear and distinct ideas ' in demonstrating that God exists (when he perceives clearly and distinctly that 'existence ' is an essential attribute of God or when he puts forth the causal principle) and then justifies the truthfulness of the clear and distinct ideas by the existence of God.…

    • 1454 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    I know that it may not seem true at times that God eliminates evil, but I feel that it is true that God eliminate evil. The evil that God permits is justified because allowing that evil make possible the achievement of a greater God or the prevention of a worse evil. (Evans and Manis, pp. 160) From what I’ve already learned about free will, is that most theist incorporate their views of the free will theodicy by making a souls making theodicy. We as humans make bad choices when it comes to their freedom.…

    • 1039 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Humans cause moral evil. Natural evil is due to natural causes. With moral evil, humans cause their own suffering due to the God-given gift of free will or “free and responsible choice.” “A God who gives humans such free will necessarily brings about the possibility, and puts outside his own control whether or not that evil occurs.” Humans are therefore not responsible for their actions unless they have true choices to…

    • 1099 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Julian's Theory Of Evil

    • 1207 Words
    • 5 Pages

    It cannot use moral evil because this can be explained by the necessary existence of free will. Humans are able to sin because they have free will to obey or disobey God. If God made creatures that automatically loved him, it would not be real love, but a robotic semblance of a relationship. The argument must rely on natural evil because it does appear that these things are caused by man’s choices or God’s power. Once it is assumed that God exists, and proven that natural evil exists, it must be shown that it is impossible for the two to exist in the same universe.…

    • 1207 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    In the article presented On Being an Atheist, H.J. McCloskey uses three of the more popular proofs that theists have argued for God’s existence, in an attempt to disprove that there is a God. First he discusses the cosmological argument. The cosmological argument makes an effort to conclude the existence of God from the existence of the cosmos or universe. The arguments are called first-cause arguments.…

    • 1768 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays