Expert answer:Response to Atheist
Answer & Explanation:Instructions are in the files.mccloskeyarticle_being_atheist.pdfphil201_response_paper_grading_rubric.docphil201_response_paper_instructions__1_.docxphil201_study_guide_lesson_16.docxphil201_study_guide_lesson_17.docx
mccloskeyarticle_being_atheist.pdf
phil201_response_paper_grading_rubric.doc
phil201_response_paper_instructions__1_.docx
phil201_study_guide_lesson_16.docx
phil201_study_guide_lesson_17.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
PHIL 201
RESPONSE PAPER GRADING RUBRIC
Value
Points
120
40
Criteria
Good / Excellent
CONTENT
100–120
o Major points are
stated clearly and
are well-supported
o Content is
persuasive and
comprehensive
o Content and
purpose of the
writing is clear
o Thesis has a strong
Development
claim
o The audience is
clear and
appropriate for the
topic
o Supportive
information (if
required) is strong
and addresses
writing focus
Good / Excellent
30–40
o Writing is wellstructured, clear,
and easy to follow
o Introduction
compellingly
forecasts the topic
and thesis
o Each paragraph is
unified and has a
Organization
clear central idea
and
o Transitional
Structure
wording is present
throughout the
writing
o Conclusion is a
logical end to the
writing
Levels of Achievement
Fair / Competent
60–99
o Major points are
addressed but
clarity or support is
limited
o Content is
somewhat
persuasive or
comprehensive
o Content is
inconsistent (lack of
clear purpose and
/or clarity)
o Thesis could be
stronger
o Supportive
information (if
required) needs
strengthening or
does not address
writing concepts
Fair / Competent
15–29
o Adequately
organized with
some areas difficult
to follow
o Introduction needs
to provide a
stronger gateway
into the writing
o Some paragraphs
lack unity
o Better transitions
are needed to
provide fluency of
ideas
o Conclusion is trite
or barely serves its
purpose
Deficient
0–59
o Major points are
unclear and / or
insufficiently
supported
o Content is missing
essentials
o Content has
unsatisfactory
purpose, focus, and
clarity
o Supportive
information (if
required) is missing
Deficient
0–14
o Organization and
structure detract
from the writer’s
message
o Introduction and /
or conclusion is
incomplete or
missing
o Paragraphs are not
unified (more than
one topic / missing
or inadequate
controlling and
concluding
sentences)
o Transitions are
missing
o Conclusion, if
present, fails to
serve its purpose
Page 1 of 2
PHIL 201
Value
Criteria
FORM
20
20
Grammar
and Diction
Format
Good / Excellent
15–20
o The writing reflects
grammatical,
punctuation, and
spelling standards
o Language is
accurate,
appropriate, and
effective
o Writing’s tone is
appropriate and
highly effective
Good / Excellent
15–20
o Writing correctly
follows formatting
guidelines
o Parenthetical and
bibliographical
source citations are
used correctly and
appropriately
Levels of Achievement
Fair / Competent
8–14
o The writing contains
some grammatical,
punctuation, and / or
spelling errors
o Language is unclear,
awkward or
inappropriate in
parts
o The writing’s tone is
generally
appropriate and
moderately effective
Fair / Competent
8–14
o Writing follows
most formatting
guidelines, but some
flaws are detected
o Parenthetical and
bibliographical
source citations are
incorrectly
formatted or used
Deficient
0–7
o The writing contains
many grammatical,
punctuation and / or
spelling errors
o Language use is
largely inaccurate or
inappropriate
o The writing’s tone is
ineffective and / or
inappropriate
Deficient
0–7
o Writing lacks many
elements of correct
formatting
o Parenthetical and
bibliographical
source citations and
/ or references are
not provided
Page 2 of 2
PHIL 201
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’s short 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
must be written as a single essay and not just a list of answers to questions.
3. The basis for your answers must 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 must 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 must 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 must remain respectful. Any disparaging
comment(s) about McCloskey will result in a significant reduction in grade.
8. Please note that this paper will 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 0 for the paper and the
likelihood of you being dropped from the course.
Page 1 of 3
PHIL 201
Specifically, you must 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 Foreman’s comments in his “Approaching the
Question of God’s Existence” 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 avoidable 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?
Page 2 of 3
PHIL 201
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.
Submit this assignment by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of Module/Week 7.
Page 3 of 3
PHIL 201
STUDY GUIDE: LESSON 16
Philosophy of Religion: Introduction
Lesson Overview:
With this lesson, we begin our unit on philosophy of religion. Religious questions are among the
most important for the vast majority of persons: Is there a God? Is there an afterlife? Why does
God allow evil and suffering? How can we know God? Are miracles possible? What is the
relation between faith and reason? In this first lesson, we explore exactly how philosophy and
religion relate to each other. Can we objectively explore religion from a philosophical vantage
point? We will critically examine 2 extreme answers to this question and then arrive at a
proposed way that religious beliefs can be philosophically investigated.
Tasks:
Read Chapter 1 of Philosophy of Religion: Thinking about Faith, “What is Philosophy of
Religion?” As you read, make sure you understand the following points and questions:
•
•
•
•
•
•
Explain the distinctions between philosophy of religion and sociology, history, theology,
and religious philosophy.
Explain the arguments for and problems with fideism.
What 2 factors do Evans and Manis raise in answering the fideist claim that critical
reflection about religious beliefs is arrogant and presumptuous?
According to Evans and Manis, is it possible to be completely neutral, and is it valid?
How is critical dialogue a balance between fideism and neutralism?
What are some criteria for testing basic religious beliefs, suggested in Evans and Manis’
concept of critical dialogue?
Terms:
Make sure you fully understand the following terms and concepts:
•
•
•
•
•
Philosophy of Religion
Natural Theology
Religious Philosophy
Fideism
Neutralism
•
•
•
•
Foundationalism
Strong Foundationalism
Weak Foundationalism
Critical Dialogue
PHIL 201
STUDY GUIDE: LESSON 17
The Concept of God
Lesson Overview:
Central to most religions is the belief in a supreme being. However, there are a number of
different ideas of the nature of that being. In this lesson, we will survey a number of different
concepts of God. We will then settle on the traditional God of monotheism as the concept most
often appealed to in western society. We will also explore those attributes that have customarily
been assigned to him. In discussing the attributes of God, we will explore 2 of the most puzzling
problems in traditional theology: divine foreknowledge/ human freedom and religious language.
We will also discuss the primary means that philosophers use to understand God—natural
theology. There will be a lot of terminology for this lesson. Finally, in preparation for our next
lesson, we will discuss some of the elements that go into arguing for the existence of the
traditional God of theism.
Tasks:
View and take notes of the presentation, “Approaching the Question of God’s Existence.”
•
Know the 4 elements of approaching the question of God’s existence.
Read Chapter 2 of Philosophy of Religion: Thinking about Faith, “The Theistic God: The Project
of Natural Theology.” As you read, make sure you understand the following points and
questions:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Describe the different conceptions of God.
What are the characteristics of the classical conception of monotheism?
What are the qualifications in saying that God is infinite?
What 2 ways are meant when Christians claim God is a “necessary” being?
What is the problem of divine foreknowledge and human freedom?
What is the difference between “necessarily God knowing the future” and “the future
necessarily occurring?”
Explain Boethius’s solution to the problem and criticisms of it.
Explain the compatibilist solution and criticisms of it.
Explain the middle knowledge solution and the primary objection to it.
Explain the open theism solution and the problem with it.
Evans conclusion to the problem of divine foreknowledge and human freedom.
What is the problem of religious language?
What are 2 problems with the verifiability theory?
What function does natural theology play for Christian philosophers?
What is the distinction between natural theology and revealed theology?
Explain the distinction between an argument being valid, sound, or a successful proof
(this is a review of terms discussed in Lesson 5).
What are 2 reasons a sound argument might still fail as a convincing proof?
What is Evans’ conclusion concerning a successful proof for God’s existence?
Page 1 of 2
PHIL 201
Terms:
Make sure you fully understand the following terms and concepts:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Theism
Polytheism
Henotheism
Monotheism
Pantheism
Panentheism
Theistic Dualism
Deism
Absolute Monism
Agnosticism
Atheism
Naturalism
Omnipotent
Immutable
Omniscient
Necessary Being
Aseity
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Omnipresence
Divine Foreknowledge
Alternate Possibilities concept of
Freedom
Theological Compatibilism
Middle Knowledge
Open Theism
Logical Positivism
Verifiable Theory of Meaning
Analytic Proposition
Synthetic Proposition
Natural Theology
Revealed Theology
Valid
Sound
Best Explanation Approach
Cumulative Case Approach
Minimlistic Concept of God
Page 2 of 2
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
How it works
- Paste your instructions in the instructions box. You can also attach an instructions file
- Select the writer category, deadline, education level and review the instructions
- Make a payment for the order to be assignment to a writer
- Download the paper after the writer uploads it
Will the writer plagiarize my essay?
You will get a plagiarism-free paper and you can get an originality report upon request.
Is this service safe?
All the personal information is confidential and we have 100% safe payment methods. We also guarantee good grades