The existence of God, a topic discussed in both William Rowe’s and Robin Collins’ papers, but for two very different reasons. The argument of good vs. evil and the existence of an omnipresent, benevolent being such as God is a topic that many find very difficult to find answers for, and will continue to plague mankind for the rest of our existence. After reading the published works of Mr. Collins and Mr. Rowe, one may find it easier to formulate their own opinion. In the publication by Mr. Collins, he addresses the topic of atheism and theism in respect to physics. He is attempting to find a reasonable answer to physics’ theory of fine-tuning. Fine-tuning is described as the extremely minute margin that allows intelligent life possible. If many things, such as gravity
…show more content…
Rowe’s paper, he approaches the subject of God verses no God in a very different context. His forethought for discussing this topic is to understand the existence of evil. Is evil a reason to dispute the existence of God, or an omnipotent, benevolent being? Rowe broaches this subject in understanding the reason for suffering in the world. He states that a reason that atheism is more probable is due to the fact that any benevolent being would not allow suffering to occur unless it was for the greater good or the suffering was in place of something worse happening. Mr. Rowe argues both sides of this debate. He builds a valid argument for both atheism and theism. He shows us how a theist may dispute the atheistic viewpoint by using the G.E. Moore shift. The G.E. Moore shift tells us to deny an opposing conclusion and use it to dispute their premises. For example, a theist could deny the atheist conclusion that God does not exist, by stating that there does not exist suffering that an omniscient being could stop without allowing an evil that is worse. Therefore, this benevolent God with stop any suffering that was not for the greater good or was in place of something worse, so God does
Rowe’s paper, he approaches the subject of God verses no God in a very different context. His forethought for discussing this topic is to understand the existence of evil. Is evil a reason to dispute the existence of God, or an omnipotent, benevolent being? Rowe broaches this subject in understanding the reason for suffering in the world. He states that a reason that atheism is more probable is due to the fact that any benevolent being would not allow suffering to occur unless it was for the greater good or the suffering was in place of something worse happening. Mr. Rowe argues both sides of this debate. He builds a valid argument for both atheism and theism. He shows us how a theist may dispute the atheistic viewpoint by using the G.E. Moore shift. The G.E. Moore shift tells us to deny an opposing conclusion and use it to dispute their premises. For example, a theist could deny the atheist conclusion that God does not exist, by stating that there does not exist suffering that an omniscient being could stop without allowing an evil that is worse. Therefore, this benevolent God with stop any suffering that was not for the greater good or was in place of something worse, so God does