Logic and Reason

Originally posted by SharpeMother
What is it that you don't understand? How hard is it to understand "Are logic and reason laws?"..? How can I make it any clearer so that you can understand it?

How can I make it any clearer so that you can understand it?

I gave you a few suggestions in my previous post. How about giving them a try?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]How can I make it any clearer so that you can understand it?

I gave you a few suggestions in my previous post. How about giving them a try?[/b]

Ok, the first question that I asked is "Are logic and reason laws?".

Do you know what logic and reason are? How can I further define what I mean by my original question?

ARE LOGIC AND REASON LAWS? OR ARE THEY CONVENTIONS?

Originally posted by epiphinehas
If I were Immanuel Kant, maybe.

Yeah that would sure be interesting, huh? 🙂

Originally posted by SharpeMother
Ok, the first question that I asked is "Are logic and reason laws?".

Do you know what logic and reason are? How can I further define what I mean by my original question?

ARE LOGIC AND REASON LAWS? OR ARE THEY CONVENTIONS?

Hmmm, perhaps you missed this suggestion:
"It might also help if you plainly state what you mean instead of asking questions."

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Hmmm, perhaps you missed this suggestion:
"It might also help if you plainly state what you mean instead of asking questions."

You are telling me that it might help if I state what I mean instead of ask a question. I am not going to abide by your terms of this debate. I started the thread asking simple questions, and I have further tried to understand what you DON'T understand about my questions, but you have refused to tell me what it is that you don't understand. Instead you are just telling me that I need to say it differently, not as a question, define it more clearly, etc. If you do not want to answer the question then why are you even on the forum? Just answer the simple question "Are logic and reason laws? Or are they conventions?"

So this is my claim:

Logic and reason cannot be accounted for by the atheistic world view.

In other words:

Logic and reason just are, which doesn't explain how they came about.

Only the existence of God can explain the existence of logic and reason. Without God logic and reason cannot be accounted for.

Originally posted by SharpeMother
You are telling me that it might help if I state what I mean instead of ask a question. I am not going to abide by your terms of this debate. I started the thread asking simple questions, and I have further tried to understand what you DON'T understand about my questions, but you have refused to tell me what it is that you don't understand. Instead you ...[text shortened]... forum? Just answer the simple question "Are logic and reason laws? Or are they conventions?"

When did you stop beating your wife?

Originally posted by TerrierJack
When did you stop beating your wife?

Hahaha, it says sharpemother because I'm a mother... I'm a wife... and what makes you think I've stopped beating my husband?? 😀 😵

Originally posted by SharpeMother
So this is my claim:

Logic and reason cannot be accounted for by the atheistic world view.

In other words:

Logic and reason just are, which doesn't explain how they came about.

Only the existence of God can explain the existence of logic and reason. Without God logic and reason cannot be accounted for.

Since you have refused to give definitions of the words 'logic' and 'reason' we must assume that you are using one of the variations of the standard definitions.
The first error you are making is in tying the two together and apparently assuming that what applies to one necessarily applies to the other. That is clearly a logical error. I do not think I need consensus to make that claim. Clearly logic is not a matter of consensus. But more importantly, I did not inherit logic and it did not in any way arise from evolution. Logic existed long before life.
The existence of logic, the laws of physics and various other things may have no explanation. Certainly the existence of God does not explain them - unless you mean something more by 'God' than standard usage.
Reason, (by one definition of the word) is the ability to think and hopefully think logically (but logical thinking as you clearly demonstrate is not a requirement). Reason, (or the ability to reason as per a slightly different usage of the word), arose as a result of evolution and is not a law or consensus.
Your argument that evolution is 'material' is fundamentally flawed in that evolution is a process not the objects that it operates on and thus evolution is not material.
One also wonders how anything immaterial is 'created' and whether it really needs a creator in the first place. Why did you even bother with the whole 'logic' and 'reason' when you could just as easily taken any abstract concept like the number 2 and made the same claim?
Did God create the number 2? If not then who did?
And finally, we all know that all such arguments lead to the obvious "who created God"? If you claim he does not need a creator then both logic and reason have fled (destroying your argument 🙂 )

Originally posted by SharpeMother
Hahaha, it says sharpemother because I'm a mother... I'm a wife... and what makes you think I've stopped beating my husband?? 😀 😵

You'll get no argument from me about any of that.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Since you have refused to give definitions of the words 'logic' and 'reason' we must assume that you are using one of the variations of the standard definitions.
The first error you are making is in tying the two together and apparently assuming that what applies to one necessarily applies to the other. That is clearly a logical error. I do not think I n ...[text shortened]... ed a creator then both logic and reason have fled (destroying your argument 🙂 )

According to Wikipedia "The concept of 'reason' is closely related to the concepts of language and logic, as reflected in the multiple meanings of the Greek word "logos", the root of logic, which translated into Latin became "ratio" and then in French "raison", from which the English word "reason" was derived." - So yes, I do believe that logic and reason are very closely tied.

My original post was based on the assumption that atheists use logic and reason to disprove the existence of God, or at least atheists demand that Christians use logic and reason to prove the existence of God. Is that assumption correct?

I didn't realize that logic and reason has any other definitions… but here is Webster's definition of the two:

Logic: a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration : the science of the formal principles of reasoning.

Reason: the power of comprehending, inferring, or thinking especially in orderly rational ways.

You said, "Logic existed long before life." - God also existed long before life. If you can make that statement about logic then I can also make that statement about God, or else you are being arbitrary.

Originally posted by TerrierJack
You'll get no argument from me about any of that.

Although I did take taekwando a few years ago when I was 17, I could hardly beat up my husband, he's a big dude. Ripped. 😵

Originally posted by SharpeMother
What is it that you don't understand? How hard is it to understand "Are logic and reason laws?"..? How can I make it any clearer so that you can understand it?

What is a law?

What is the difference between logic and reason?

Logic derives from the Greek word logos 'meaning "word, speech, discourse," also "reason," from PIE base *leg- "to collect" (with derivatives meaning "to speak," on notion of "to pick out words;" see lecture)'; 'reason' is pretty much the ability to think logically.

From a Christian perspective, logic would be the Word. What is the Word?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Logic existed long before life.

Interesting statement, much like the assertion that the Word always was and will be ... But why do you say that logic existed before life?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Since you have refused to give definitions of the words 'logic' and 'reason' we must assume that you are using one of the variations of the standard definitions.
The first error you are making is in tying the two together and apparently assuming that what applies to one necessarily applies to the other. That is clearly a logical error. I do not think I n ...[text shortened]... ed a creator then both logic and reason have fled (destroying your argument 🙂 )

Logic existed long before life.
i disagree. logic is a conscious process. logic is not a pheonomenon like rain or an errupting volcano. logic occurs if a conscious being makes a conscius effort to come up with a reasoning based on information through certain rules.