My Response to Mccloskey's "On Being an Atheist"
My response to McCloskey’s "On Being an Atheist."
The paper written by McCloskey is nothing more than an Atheists attempt to justify his atheistic ideas and at no time should ever be taken by any other person as anything more than one man’s opinions which are based completely upon speculative ideas. Throughout this paper, I read statements like, “theists feel…”,” Most theists believe…”, “They do not think…”, and “Most theists conclude…”; however, the person giving these tidbits is only one person, as opposed to the “most” which he seems to speak for, and he is no more a “theist”, than the “man in the moon”. I would be more inclined to over look his made-up statistics, had a single one of his claims lined up with my theistic ideas; however, every time he claimed to know how the “theists” think or feel, it turned out to be the opposite of my theistic point of view. The very basis for this fallacy can be tied to a statement in McCloskey’s opening sentence: “…the grounds upon which theists base their belief in God…” In this statement, McCloskey claims to know why theists believe in God. My next claim is pure speculation; however, if I were to ask every person in my church congregation, “why do you believe in God”, I seriously doubt anyone would respond with the cosmological argument or the teleological argument.
Another problem I found in his philosophy was, throughout his writing, McCloskey talks about how Christians use arguments as “proofs”; however, they are not proofs but merely ideas and arguments that when looked at as a whole, seem to give support to a claim. Since they do not definitively establish a case for God, McCloskey says these arguments should be abandoned. Again, McCloskey seems to think that he knows the inner mind of “most” theistic people and claims that we hold certain ideas or theories as proof. I know quite a few theists; however, I can’t recall ever hearing a single one saying that they have definitive proof of
The paper written by McCloskey is nothing more than an Atheists attempt to justify his atheistic ideas and at no time should ever be taken by any other person as anything more than one man’s opinions which are based completely upon speculative ideas. Throughout this paper, I read statements like, “theists feel…”,” Most theists believe…”, “They do not think…”, and “Most theists conclude…”; however, the person giving these tidbits is only one person, as opposed to the “most” which he seems to speak for, and he is no more a “theist”, than the “man in the moon”. I would be more inclined to over look his made-up statistics, had a single one of his claims lined up with my theistic ideas; however, every time he claimed to know how the “theists” think or feel, it turned out to be the opposite of my theistic point of view. The very basis for this fallacy can be tied to a statement in McCloskey’s opening sentence: “…the grounds upon which theists base their belief in God…” In this statement, McCloskey claims to know why theists believe in God. My next claim is pure speculation; however, if I were to ask every person in my church congregation, “why do you believe in God”, I seriously doubt anyone would respond with the cosmological argument or the teleological argument.
Another problem I found in his philosophy was, throughout his writing, McCloskey talks about how Christians use arguments as “proofs”; however, they are not proofs but merely ideas and arguments that when looked at as a whole, seem to give support to a claim. Since they do not definitively establish a case for God, McCloskey says these arguments should be abandoned. Again, McCloskey seems to think that he knows the inner mind of “most” theistic people and claims that we hold certain ideas or theories as proof. I know quite a few theists; however, I can’t recall ever hearing a single one saying that they have definitive proof of