SUTG

Can you give some examples of universal laws of logic?

Can you please give a more detailed (one or two paragrahs) account of your position with examples?

Kent Symanzik

Hi HRG,

Aren't you confusing the actual laws of logic with the systems that have been formulated to express these laws? You seem to be saying that the laws of logic did not exist before they were formulated by the semantics of our language. But, if this is the case then the laws of logic are dependent on our language and thus dependent on humans. Therefore, they certainly would not be universal but rather contigent.

Another problem is that the universe would not conform the the laws of logic. But, that is not what we find. Even before humans came on the scene, we assume that A could not be non-A. For example, a rock A could not not rock A. Or a particular rock A could not be on earth and on the moon at the same time.

My point simply is that the laws of logic are not just a language construct. Everything in the universe abides by these laws.

Kent

Kent Symanzik

Hi K,

You bring up a good question. Yes, you must presuppose the laws of logic in order to prove them. We can't even think or have dialogue without them. So yes, I expect us all to assume them but then to evaluate our respective worldviews to see if the worldviews can account for the laws of logic. If the laws of logic are universal and invariant but our worldview cannot support universals then our worldview is incorrect.

So, to answer your question, we are not so much evaluated the laws of logic themselves but whether our worldviews can accord for the laws of logic.

Hope this makes sense. I know it can get confusing.

Kent

Kent Symanzik

Hi SUTG,

Thanks for asking for clarification. I do wish I could explain myself more clearly. This is something I am working to improve.

An example of universal laws of logic would be the same example I gave a couple of posts back. The law of non-contradiction. We expect it to hold throughout the universe without exception. A is not non-A. It cannot be true that my car is in the parking lot and not true that my car is in the parking lot at the same time and in the same sense.

My position is that these laws are true, universal, and invariant. Science depends on this as well as all that we do. The question is whether we have a worldview that can account for universal and invariant laws. I hold that my Christian worldview does account for these laws. The laws of logic are not laws that God has created but rather they are part of his universal and unchanging character. They are a description of the way God thinks. God created the universe and created us in his image. The universe acts according to these laws and we think and act according to them as well. These laws cannot change because God's character does not change.

This does not mean that God doesn't change his actions according to his plans. This is often something that is confused when talking of God's unchanging character. For instance, God demanded animal sacrifices before Christ but after Christ he did not. This is because Christ was the ultimate sacrifice that rendered animal sacrifices unnecessary. In the same way, we humans change our actions without changing our character.

Kent

acronos

I am not sure we agree here. I have no experiences that contradict with my worldview. I have some experiences that I don’t know why they happen. I agree that I don’t know everything. You changed from ‘we’ to ‘you’ in this sentence. Are you claiming you do know everything? Are you claiming that your theistic worldview explains why it happened when your daughter gets raped and murdered? Why God didn't answer your prayers? Why God honored the "free will" of the rapist over the "free will" of your daughter? Why God allowed your daughter to suffer for someone else's, Adam and Eve's, sin? Are you claiming that you know why God does everything he does? If not, why do you expect me to know why the universe does everything it does?

I don’t see how you reach that conclusion. I sincerely wish you would elaborate. I think my atheist worldview is far less contradictory than any theist worldview that I have seen. I am completely unaware of ANY contradictions in my worldview, whereas I am aware of an incredible number of contradictions in the Christian worldview.

More fruit would be good.

The only thing that I have understood you to say concerning why my world view is contradictory is that I supposedly can’t have absolutes in my worldview. While you have repeatedly stated this, I have seen almost no support for it. All of the support that you have offered was due to misconceptions about what I believe. Please, help me out. I want to understand what you believe. Why do you believe my worldview is contradictory?

[ August 31, 2002: Message edited by: acronos ]</p>

HRG

They are universal in the sense that as soon as you describe some event in human language, the description conforms to the laws of logic. When and where that event happened is of no concern.

An illustration may help: whenever and wherever a game of chess is played according to the rules, a bishop never changes color.
It's our description of the universe which conforms to the laws of logic.
"Non-A" is meaningless. "Not" applies to statements, not to things.
That's because of the semantics of "not". "X is a rock" is an elementary statement which can be true or false. "X is not a rock" (or Not (X is a rock)) is a composite statement which is defined to be true when "X is not a rock" is false and vice versa.

This is an empirical property of macroscopic objects. An electron can be on earth and on the moon at the same time.
[quote]

My point simply is that the laws of logic are not just a language construct. Everything in the universe abides by these laws.
[quote]

Our description of the universe abides by these laws. Big difference.

Regards,
HRG.

Synaesthesia

Acronos,
This is a persistent problem with presuppositionalists. They emphasize that others are unable to solve certain (putative) problems that they themselves have no way of dealing with.


Kent,

Do you know what it means to "explain" logic?

According to what you are saying (I can't speak for your thoughts):

1. An organized God exists.
2. God is the source of all organization.

In short, you are ’explaining’ the existence of logic by postulating the existence of logic. This is directly analogous to explaining mechanical motion, the 2 slit experiment and your car's speedometer reading by positing the existence of mechanical motion as it exists, the results of the 2 slit experiment as we observe them and positing the reading of 60 that’s on your speedometer.

Does this form of "Explanation" actually explain anything? No. When we simply assume the brute fact of what we are claiming to explain, we can never shed light on deeper truths.

Presuppositionalism is no more than methodical dogmatism. Just because atheists have not committed themselves to a circular dogma does not mean that the existence of logic poses any more problems to their position than it does for theists.

Regards,
Synaesthesia

Kent Symanzik

Hi acronos,

I'm not claiming to know everything. God certainly has not revealed all his knowledge. My point is that what I do know is not contradictory with my worldview. No, I would not know why my daughter was raped. I would only know that it was an evil act and the rapist should be punished.

Now if it was your daughter I'm sure you would feel the same. You would call the act evil and expect justice to be done. This is where you would be contradicting your atheistic worldview. There is no actual right or wrong in atheistic worldviews. It's just a matter of taste. The rapist has a taste for rape. You cannot condemn the act use subjective ethics because the ethics of the rapist are just as rational as your own.

Your worldview is contradictory whenever you make use of universals like logic, ethics, uniformity of nature. You do not have a metaphysical foundation for these things. In your worldview, somehow laws of logic exist even though the universe ultimately is complete irrational. What is logic in your worldview? What can you provide in reality that is it's foundation? It just isn't there. And yet you reason and expect others to abide by the same universal, invariant laws of logic that you do.

Everytime you logon to this forum and post you are contradicting your worldview.

Hope I've been clearer this time.

Kent

Kent Symanzik

Hi HRG,

Are you saying that one is not acting rationally unless one's actions are being described by language? Maybe you can flesh this out a bit more. Are the laws of logic universal in your view?

Kent

Kent Symanzik

Hi Synaesthesia,

I have never said that I presuppose logic. I presuppose Christian theism. The Christian God provides the metaphysical foundation for all universals. The laws of logic have their foundation in God's character. The laws of logic are set forth in God's nature and the way that God thinks and expects us to think.

Oh, but they have. Everytime you think you are presupposing something. You are at least presupposing the laws of logic which you do not even have a metaphysical foundation for. That has been my point. We all presuppose things. But, only the Christian is rational in doing so because only the Christian has a metaphysical foundation for the universal laws of logic, ethics, and the uniformity of nature.

Kent