Assignment on Philosophy PDF

Running Head: PHILOSOPHY 1
Defense on: Does God Exist?
[Author Name(s), First M. Last, Omit Titles and Degrees]
[Institutional Affiliation(s)]
Author Note
[Include any grant/funding information and a complete correspondence address.]

PHILOSOPHY 2
Defense on: Does God Exist?
There are numerous theories and arguments which have resulted behind the creation
of the never-ending debate on the topic, Does God exist? Before making attempts in the
defense of arguments of the notion, God exists, it would be better to have some outlook on
objectives of arguments for the existence of God. There are several diverse opinions and
viewpoints that exist regarding this matter, however most modern adherents of these
arguments do not get arguments from the theists in the form of proposed proofs. This is
because it is assumed that they should provide justified arguments which cannot be denied by
a reasonable individual. The advocates of theistic arguments know that no philosophical
arguments can reach the achievement standards that can set the success bar really high. It is
quite possible for some arguments in the favor of God’s existence to prove that there could be
some evidences of the existence of God as well. Such arguments that are supported by
evidences help in increasing the claim’s probability. A presumption of atheism is held by
many secular philosophers, which implies that the belief in God is similar to the belief in
leprechauns, which is something that is not believed upon by rational people without
adequate evidence (Osborn, 2017).
There are certain ways in which the presumption of atheism has been challenged.
According to Alvin Plantinga (2010), the basis of propositional evidence is not necessary for
having reasonable belief and faith in God or the concept of God. It could be properly basic.
On the basis of this opinion, it can be said that the result of a basic faculty could be rational
belief in God. Hence, it does not need no reinforcement from the arguments. In response to
this, some people might argue that even though the beliefs of theists are not educated in
sentential evidence, it still could have a requirement for non-sentential evidence like
experience (Evans, 2010). Hence, the proof challenge burden is not removed by Plantinga ‘s
views. Another way of challenging the atheism presumption is questioning an internal