On Being An Atheist Mccloskey Summary

H.J. McCloskey, in his article, “On Being an Atheist,” attempts to justify his position of unmitigated atheism. McCloskey presents a series of arguments, dichotomizing classical claims made by those who advocate the existence of a Creator, more specifically the God of the bible. He begins his series of objections by way of summarizing each of the arguments, which he calls “proofs,” McCloskey contends that the cosmological or teleological proof does not justify an omniscient creator. In fact McCloskey reasons that the existence of evil justifies his claim that a benevolent, moral, powerful omnipresent God is a mere fallacy in light of his presupposition regarding the nature of the universe. In contrast we can easily find ourselves in a quagmire …show more content…
McCloskey claims that the “mere existence of the world establishes no reason for believing in such a being.” Evans and Manis argue a unique approach to the cosmological argument. Their argument is dichotomized into three modules: “Some contingent beings exist. If any contingent beings exist, then a necessary being must exist (because contingent beings mandate a necessary being as their definitive cause). Consequently there occurs a necessary being (which is the ultimate cause of the existence of contingent beings).” The Domino effect is a great example of this. One push causes the whole pile to …show more content…
Our perception limits our ability to see the world as it especially at atomic and subatomic levels. I also contend that we metaphorically speaking are prisoners to our essential faculties. It limits the scope of technology thus inhibiting us from having absolute knowledge about the world and the heavens. We can argue dualistically that sensory information is not a unmitigated necessity when making a claim about an omniscient creator. In defense of the teleological argument we as humans tend to have a longing for purpose. Genealogy has become a popular outlet for people to find themselves, what purpose do they have, what caused them to be here. Is there a higher purpose? If so, what is it, why, and who caused it. Without a creator this whole premise is a subsequent regression with no definitive answers. The analogical argument offers a reasonable explanation for the explanation of the universe. Evans and Manis contend