tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post114174677354740819..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Of Logos & logicRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1141815481929375692006-03-08T05:58:00.000-05:002006-03-08T05:58:00.000-05:00It's worth mentioning a couple of things which log...It's worth mentioning a couple of things which logic is not.<BR/>Firstly, logical reasoning is not an absolute law which governs the universe. Many times in the past, people have concluded that because something is logically impossible (given the science of the day), it must be impossible, period. It was also believed at one time that Euclidean geometry was a universal law; it is, after all, logically consistent. Again, we now know that the rules of Euclidean geometry are not universal.<BR/>Secondly, logic is not a set of rules which govern human behavior. Humans may have logically conflicting goals. For example:<BR/>•John wishes to speak to whoever is in charge.<BR/>•The person in charge is Steve.<BR/>•Therefore John wishes to speak to Steve.<BR/>Unfortunately, John may have a conflicting goal of avoiding Steve, meaning that the reasoned answer may be inapplicable to real life.<BR/><BR/>http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.htmlJDHURFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02133971619468463558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1141815431948610612006-03-08T05:57:00.000-05:002006-03-08T05:57:00.000-05:00“Like knows like. Because the mind is supersensibl...“Like knows like. Because the mind is supersensible, and because the laws of logic are supersensible, the laws of logic are a natural object thought.” – Steve<BR/><BR/>You claim that the laws of logic are supersensible, what do you mean by that? Are you claiming that logic is a separate entity or manifestation in and of itself?<BR/><BR/>“One of the problems with this fideistic retreat into mystery is that it fails to distinguish between different domains of knowledge.<BR/>If the laws of logic are physical, then it may be possible for empirical science to “discover” them. But if the laws of logic are immaterial, then no advancement in science will discover the laws of logic since they are not the sort of object to which empirical methods are adapted. To suppose otherwise is to make a category mistake.” – Steve<BR/><BR/>I will not refer to logic as “the laws of logic” logic is a product of evolutionary upsurge culminating within a species with a highly advanced and developed conscious mind. What different domains of knowledge would you like to distinguish? Logic is certainly not physical.<BR/><BR/>“Several problems:<BR/>i) JD fails to explain what logical laws “are.” Since he’s a materialist who equates logic with truth, and contends in the above that logic antedated human awareness, then is he saying that logical laws are bits of matter?<BR/>Where do we find logical laws in nature? Where to they exist? Are they like large molecules which we can detect using an electron microscope or atom smasher?<BR/>By what empirical means are the laws of logic discernible?” – Steve<BR/><BR/>Logical laws are what fundamental Christians such as yourself claim, logic is merely a mode of reasoning and set of propositions constructed by human endeavor. Logic merely addresses natural truth, whether correctly or incorrectly. Logic is certainly not bits of matter. Logic exists in nature wherever there is a species of life that has a conscious that is developed and advanced enough to consider truth in such a manner. Logic exists within the conscious mind of the species in question. Logic is not discernible by empirical means.<BR/><BR/>“ii) In what sense does truth exist apart from minds? Isn’t true a property of a true belief?<BR/>If JD limits intelligence to the biological evolution of rational animals, then in what sense is it true that evolution was true before evolution evolved intelligent species?” – Steve<BR/><BR/>Truth exists apart from minds completely. Whether my mind is correct in believing the world to be round or not this is the case, this truth exists apart from my mind; however it is possible by using logic and scientific methodology to understand and know this truth. I do limit intelligence (as a conscious mechanism of the mind which is the product of a highly advanced and developed brain) to the biological AND psychological evolution of a species of life. Evolution was true before it evolved an intelligent species because evolution is a truth of nature that we, using our logic and scientific methodology, have been able to come to know and understand.<BR/><BR/>“iii) In what sense does logic “in some measure” already exist? Isn’t implication a timeless relation? Mustn’t all logical relata coexist for any logical relations to exist at all?” – Steve<BR/><BR/>It already existed in some measure in that a lower species of life using an underdeveloped brain used a lower form of logic than what we are afforded. Isn’t implication of what a timeless relation of what? When you say that all logical relations coexist for any logical relation to exist at all, what exactly do you mean?<BR/><BR/>“The laws of logic are abstract objects which inhere in the infinite, timeless, and supersensible mind of God.” – Steve<BR/><BR/>I disagree.<BR/><BR/>“What does mythology have to do with it?” – Steve<BR/><BR/>Mythology has quite a bit to do with it. I assume that you reject Roman mythology yet you certainly cannot disprove that mythology. My question is how do you know your Christian view is not the same sort of ideology as the Roman mythology?<BR/><BR/>“You cannot have a true belief without a believer. Logical truths are necessary truths. They must inhere in the mind of a necessary being.” – Steve<BR/><BR/>I do not differentiate between truths as you just now have, there are no logical truths and truths there is simply truth. Something is either true or it is not.<BR/><BR/>“6. How have you come to learn the laws of logic?<BR/>The question is ambiguous” – Steve<BR/><BR/>Evanmay had asked me this question, I was merely returning it to see his response.JDHURFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02133971619468463558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1141757390190528552006-03-07T13:49:00.000-05:002006-03-07T13:49:00.000-05:00I'm not sure if I distinguished between your respo...I'm not sure if I distinguished between your response to your interlocuter and your interlocuter's comments. But anyways, here goes my comment.<BR/><BR/>I'm not sure where I stand on all of this, but I think I may be a Christian Platonist. However, the idea that there is no truth without true belief seems to lead to idealism. I realize that van Til was an idealist. Yet, we need to cash out this idea of truth in a better manner. The notion of truth as that which God believes to be true sounds very subjective. To prevent volunteerism in ethics we usually assert that God cannot act contrary to his nature, and since God is perfectly good, God cannot declare rape to be good. <BR/><BR/>If truth is merely God's true beliefs what prevents God's beliefs from changing? We fall into a type of Euthyphro dilemma for truth. <BR/><BR/>I don't disagree that God is the ground of truth, and therefore the ground of logical truth and mathematics, but I am troubled by the notion of truth is that = God's true beliefs.<BR/><BR/>I hope I understood what you were attempting to argue, I apologize in advance if I mischaracterized your argument.Justinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08529669940027296199noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-1141749251522221672006-03-07T11:34:00.000-05:002006-03-07T11:34:00.000-05:00Craig Hawkins, Walter Martin's former co-host of t...Craig Hawkins, Walter Martin's former co-host of the Bible Answer Man did a presentation on this topic this past year at the <A HREF="http://www.emnr.org/forms/2006%20Tape%20Order%20Form.pdf" REL="nofollow">EMNR Conference</A>. I left before this session so I did not get to hear it, but Hawkins (although a Lutheran) has one of the brightest minds.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14336155651560538168noreply@blogger.com