Response Paper
Instructions
Having
completed the unit of philosophy of religion, you are now ready to respond to
an article written by an actual atheist. This article titled “On Being an
Atheist,” was written by H. J. McCloskey in 1968 for the journal Question. McCloskey is an Australian
philosopher who wrote a number of atheistic works in the 1960s and 70s
including the book God and Evil
(Nijhoff, 1974). In this article, McCloskey is both critical of the classical
arguments for God’s existence and offers the problem of evil as a reason why
one should not believe in God. Please note the following parameters for this
paper:
1. Your
assignment is to read McCloskey’sshort article found in the Reading & Study
folder in Module/Week 7 and respond to each of the questions below. Your
instructor is looking for a detailed response to each question.
2. The
response paper is to be a minimum of 1,500 words (not including quotes) and
should be written as a single essay and not just a list of answers to
questions.
3. The
basis for your answers should primarily come from the resources provided in the
lessons covering the philosophy of religion unit of the course (Evans and Manis,
Craig, and the presentation) and these sources should be mentioned in your
paper. You are not merely to quote these sources as an answer to the question—answer
them in your own words.
4. You
may use other outside sources as well, as long as you properly document them.
However, outside sources are not necessary. Each of the questions can be
answered from the sources provided in the lessons.
5. While
the use of the Bible is not restricted, its use is not necessary and is
discouraged unless you intend to explain the context of the passage and how
that context applies to the issue at hand in accordance with the guidelines
provided earlier in the course. You are not to merely quote scripture passages
as answers to the questions. Remember this is a philosophical essay not a
biblical or theological essay.
6. While
you may quote from sources, all quotations should be properly cited and quotes
from sources will not count towards the 1,500 word count of the paper.
7. You
may be critical of McCloskey, but should remain respectful. Any disparaging
comment(s) about McCloskey will result in a significant reduction in grade.
8. Please
note that all papers are to be submitted through SafeAssign, which is a
plagiarism detection program. The program is a database of previously submitted
papers including copies of papers that have been located on the Internet. Once
submitted, your paper will become part of the database as well. The program
detects not only exact wording but similar wording. This means that if you
plagiarize,it is very likely that it will be discovered. Plagiarism will result
in a 0for the paper and the likelihood of you being dropped from the
course.
Specifically,
you should address the following questions in your paper:
1. McCloskey
refers to the arguments as “proofs” and often implies that they can’t
definitively establish the case for God, so therefore they should be abandoned.
What would you say about this in light of my comments on the approaches to the
arguments in the PointeCast presentation?
2. On
the Cosmological Argument:
a. McCloskey
claims that the “mere existence of the world constitutes no reason for
believing in such a being [i.e., a necessarily existing being].” Using Evans
and Manis’ discussion of the non-temporal form of the argument (on pp. 69–77),explain
why the cause of the universe must be necessary (and therefore uncaused).
b. McCloskey
also claims that the cosmological argument “does not entitle us to postulate an
all-powerful, all-perfect, uncaused cause.” In light of Evans and Manis’ final
paragraph on the cosmological argument (p. 77), how might you respond to
McCloskey?
3. On
the Teleological Argument:
a. McCloskey
claims that “to get the proof going, genuine indisputable examples of design
and purpose are needed.” Discuss this standard of “indisputability” which he
calls a “very conclusive objection.” Is it reasonable?
b. From
your reading in Evans and Manis, can you offer an example of design that, while
not necessarily “indisputable,” you believe provides strong evidence of a
designer of the universe?
c. McCloskey
implies that evolution has displaced the need for a designer. Assuming
evolution is true, for argument’s sake, how would you respond to McCloskey (see
Evans and Manis pp. 82–83)?
d. 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 Evans and Manis’ comments about the limitations of the cosmological
argument, how might you respond to this charge by McCloskey?
4. On
the Problem of Evil:
a. McCloskey’s
main objection to theism is the presence of evil in the world and he raises it
several times: “No being who was perfect could have created a world in which
there was unavoidable suffering or in which his creatures would (and in fact
could have been created so as not to) engage in morally evil acts, acts which
very often result in injury to innocent persons.” The language of this claim
seems to imply that it is an example of the logical form of the problem. Given
this implication and using Evans and Manis’ discussion of the logical problem
(pp. 159–168, noting especially his concluding paragraphs to this section), how
might you respond to McCloskey?
b. McCloskey
specifically discusses the free will argument, asking “might not God have very
easily so have arranged the world and biased man to virtue that men always
freely chose what is right?” From what you have already learned about free will
in the course, and what Evans and Manis says about the free will theodicy,
especially the section on Mackie and Plantinga’s response (pp. 163–166) and
what he says about the evidential problem (pp. 168–172), how would you respond
to McCloskey’s question?
5. On
Atheism as Comforting:
a. In the final pages of McCloskey’s article, he claims that
atheism is more comforting than theism. Using the argument presented by William
Lane Craig in the article “The Absurdity of Life without God,” (located in
Reading & Study for Module/Week 6), respond to McCloskey’s claim.
The Response Paper is due by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of
Module/Week 7.
No comments:
Post a Comment