Term Paper on "Respond to Hj Mccloskey"

Term Paper 6 pages (2573 words) Sources: 6

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Atheist" by H.J. McCloskey and answer the following questions using "Philosophy of Religion-Thinking About Faith" second edition by C.Stephens Evans & R. Zacharary Manis and the article "The Absurdity of Life With God" by William Lane Craig. I am permitted to use some outside help, but mostly the ones given:

On the Cosmological argument: McCloskey claims that the mere existence of the world constitutes no reason for believing in such a being (i.e. A necessarily existing being)

This is a misnomer. This, like Evans' article, does not hold true objectivity. There is more of a Christian influence, and a defensive combativeness accordingly. The resilience of the Cosmological Argument rests in its straightforwardness and readily comprehensible concept that there cannot be infinite causes to an event, leaving it perfectly logical to assert that objects do not bring themselves into being and must, therefore, have causes.

However, if all things need a cause to exist, then God Himself must also, by definition, need a cause to exist. However, contrary to the underlying definition, God was the uncaused-cause. Another contradiction. If the mere existence of the universe attributes to God's existence and being, and the "mere existences of the world constitutes no reason for believing in such a being," then a choice to act at a specific time in the past is the best explanation of the existence of the universe. This is entirely faulty, and, again, this is a circular explanation. Conscious choices and decisions from which conclusions are drawn are responsive and conscious, thereby making them human. This uncaused-cause is a misnomer.

Both Evans and McCloskey, in these readings, contend their points defensively. Thus, these are both overtly tenable. In addition, these are both tenable as well as tentative, in that these fragmented, uncertain, unreliable, and defective claims are ungrounded.

Clarification: This all-encompassing regard for religious principles, which all maintain this "many roads to truth" interpretation, contradicts itself. Being that none of this is in anyway understandable until acknowledging it through a Christian viewpoint, would that not only add to the fact that this reading is circular? I think so, but when I look again for substance, I end up at the same conclusion. Thus, this circular reading holds no merit. When Evans illustrates how this is surely confusion in and of itself, that declares all the confirmation I need. Truth claims, this idea of inclusive vs. exclusive world, borrowing truth claims... None of this leads anywhere but back around to the start.

For instance, Evans explains several inconsistencies in this philosophy of life or conception of the world in that thinking better equips us to be more deliberate. This is clearly based on a presumption that we are and have been ill-equipped from the start. This coincides with Christian ethics in the assumption that humans are all flawed and inept. One contradictory point would be that Evans, too, is human; therefore, his claims are flawed just as well, so they are pointless. However, at least his "enlightenment" on this uncertainty has enabled the reader to make understandable an often indistinct analysis of a comprehensive philosophical dogma.

Explain why the cause of the universe must be necessary (and therefore uncaused)

3. McCloskey also claimed that the Cosmological argument does not entitle us to postulate an all powerful, all perfect, uncaused cause.

McCloskey toys with this play on words, denoting this revelation of Biblical energies. God, being the uncaused-cause, would be the existence of Christian ethics and morals. God, being impersonal and cruel, would be the existence of Catholic ethics and morals. Catholicism is a branch of Christianity and Christian beliefs, but with a more heavily instilled emphasis on guilt. McCloskey offers seemingly inarguable criticism on behalf of the contradictory forces behind Christianity and Christian ethics throughout, though he does not sufficiently disprove the Bible and Biblical theology.

5. From your reading in Evans, can you offer an example of design that, while not necessarily indisputable, you believe provides strong evidence of a design of the universe?

The Supernatural in an Empirical Question

Now we come to a matter of two worlds, which have thus far been at a polar opposition, and speculate theoretically whether Science and Religion may find compatibility. Despite the lack of evidence to provide confirmation, Science assumes that naturalist metaphysics exist. Moreover, this assumption is based on the fact that the practice of science could not exist if supernatural explanations are allowed (Mahner, Bunge; 1996). All along this is nothing more than an angle, or a matter of perception. Nature, when seen as a preconception or the collective hypotheses of Science, will never find direction. However, when understood fully as a conclusive guide, Science then becomes the growing yet provisional guide based upon what has been discovered thus far; but at least a dependable and continuous guide nonetheless.

6. McCloskey implies that evolution has displaced the need for a designer. Assuming evolution is true, for argument sake how would you respond to McCloskey (see Evans pp. 65-66)?

These are a bit more congruent than commonly realized. Science is the yin to the yang provided by Religion. That compatibility is indeed present. In this day and age, before accepting any unfounded assumption, a scientific examination of available evidence is necessary. The basis of that understanding as being 'common sense' clearly illustrates how humans have evolved thus far. Furthermore, this verifies where humanity will progress from this point we exist currently. Science continues and will continue until it can validate the paranormal, or until it can declare otherwise what is exact, what is unbiased, what is neutral, and what is factual.

7. McCloskey claims that the presence of imperfection and evil in the world argues against the perfection of the divine design or divine purpose in the world. Remembering Evanss comments about the limitations of the Cosmological Argument, how might you respond to the this charge by McCloskey?

This sound, inarguable criticism on behalf of the contradictory forces behind Christianity and Christian ethics are refraining the readers of McCloskey, . Christianity goes against all human ethics, and reasons for upholding such ethics, concerning reasons for existence, both our physical and spiritual reality. For instance, Christianity focuses above all on attaining a fruitful if not prosperous afterlife -- an abstract and entirely fantastical place that these people have never been.

By default, or through contradictory measures, McCloskey, Evans, and Craig alike offer sound, inarguable criticism on behalf of the contradictory forces behind Christianity and Christian ethics. Christianity goes against all human ethics, and reasons for upholding such ethics, concerning reasons for existence, both our physical and spiritual reality. For instance, Christianity focuses above all on attaining a fruitful if not prosperous afterlife -- an abstract and entirely fantastical place that these people have never been.

Christians, accordingly, hold no worth to this life, the only life that this populace has ever comprehended and the only they will ever comprehend. This is delusional and damaging. Therefore, Christianity can only emanate out of a complete disdain for human life, and any human appreciation thereof. Moreover, this renounces the acceptance of science and modern technology as well as disallows praise or even acknowledgement for human accomplishment. Life is therefore not in itself worth living, but must be tolerated in order to ever achieve something conceptual and theoretical, even though never demonstrated by evidence or valid argument as true or existing. Christianity, then, only hinders our perceived reality and prevents any worth or value toward that perceived reality.

Bring to mind the confusion between moral and immoral, or morality and immorality inherent in Christianity. For any belief which is instinctual, it is sinful and wrong; for any curiosity or human interest, the Christian is defiant and unfaithful; when any temptation is sexual in nature, it is sinful -- Christianity disparages human sexuality right alongside desire or seduction; instinctual uncertainty and cynicism equates to an evil and immoral act. What's more, the hypocrisy between the "forgive and forget" sense instilled within the abhorrence of a Christian's sense of self, as also witnessed in the eye for and eye standard matched alongside the overwhelmingly sermonized concepts of compassion and pity, even the ideally cast "theoretical" Christian can never escape a state of exile throughout any empirical experience.

Christians are set up to feel shame for instinctual urges and sexual motivations. This concept concerning faith discourages Christians' sense of curiosity and natural skepticism; Moreover, the concept of pity encourages Christians to value and cherish weakness. All these faults, yet still to this day Christianity reigns supreme in an overwhelmingly larger part of the world. This would seem to take away from the has become a work of art part of the equation, but just the opposite. This again goes back to the human need to socialize, that humans are social mammals.

In light of Evans final paragraph on the Cosmological Argument (page 59) JHow mighjt you respond to McCloskey.

Religions have evolved, especially within the first decade of the twenty-first century. Religions continue to evolve. Moreover,… READ MORE

How to Reference "Respond to Hj Mccloskey" Term Paper in a Bibliography

Related Term Papers:

Mccloskey Asserts That the Initial Belief Article Critique

McCloskey asserts that the initial belief of the Christians does not always come because of the belief they have in the existence of God

They always have other reasons for… read more

Article Critique 5 pages (1593 words) Sources: 4 Topic: Religion / God / Theology

---

Vatican Declaration the Vatican's Declaration on Procured Term Paper

Vatican Declaration

The Vatican's Declaration on Procured Abortion was issued on 18 November 1974. During this time, abortion was mainly the result of the many premarital sexual connections begun during… read more

Term Paper 6 pages (2121 words) Sources: 4 Style: MLA Topic: Abortion / Pro-Life / Pro-Choice

---

Individual's Overall Quality of Life Essay

Individual's Overall Quality Of Life

There are several disparities that exist between the different genders. This has been shown in current research whereby they have found that there are many… read more

Essay 4 pages (1169 words) Sources: 3 Topic: Sexuality / Gender

---

Abortion and Women's Rights Research Paper

The ability for a woman to control her body is critical to her civil rights.

For most women, pregnancy does interfere with her ability to work or attend school. Society… read more

Research Paper 7 pages (2461 words) Sources: 5 Topic: Abortion / Pro-Life / Pro-Choice

---

Business Case Study

Negative Comments About Children

How do you respond? Is the customer's viewpoint ethical?

I would first start by re-examining our branding and marketing strategy. It seems as though the cafe… read more

Case Study 3 pages (906 words) Sources: 0 Topic: Business / Corporations / E-commerce

---

View 100+ more related papers  >>