Argument To Believe In God By Juliel Nagel

1227 Words3 Pages

Nagel is a profound philosopher, who defends a customary view of science a way to gain knowledge of the world. In the argument, Nagel makes it clear that there is good reason to believe that God doesn’t exist, however, he does make it clear that his views make fall along the lines of Buddhism. Nagel claims that he his questioning the theological proposition to believe in God. Nagel has given two points in proving that God does not exist. The first point goes along the lines that of that God exist, however, they don’t have a good reason to believe in God but they also have no good reason to not believe in God. Or we cannot truly understand the concept of God exist because according to Nagel its nonsense- although, we understand it as an expression …show more content…

I don’t see this being true of all moral virtue. For example, the virtue of independence is not created through suffering: its created by the need of relying on your own judgment and action. Along with that, there are a lot of evil and suffering that we see on a daily basis that does not teach us lessons, for example, a two year old dying from cancer or a hurricane destroying homes and lives; showing compassion can be praiseworthy. It may be argue, well supported by the evidence of post-Holocaust genocides, that mankind has not taken this lesson to heart. God’s goal is to create moral individuals and he allows evil to teach us moral lessons that we are supposed to learn from. Suffering and evil are not necessary conditions for moral development. We can learn morality without being subjected to evil. Likewise, purposely exposing one to evil in order to teach them a lesson seems outrageous. Another important problem with this theodicy is that it makes an image out of suffering. If morality depends on the existence of suffering, then if there was no suffering, then suffering would be solely around to have morality or teach a moral

Open Document