logic of religion
October 10th, 2008my friends and i often talk on my friend andy’s forum normlife–and a post of mine in the If there is a God, would God think? thread got me thinking about the logic involved in religious faith and belief, and i came up with this. go easy on me, as i haven’t actually had any formal instruction on logic, so this is mostly based on what i’ve gleaned from various discussions with those who have (so any bold statements of fact about logic and the study thereof should not necessarily be taken as such).
first off, i’ll define faith, as that is central to this debate:
From the American Heritage Dictionary
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief, trust.
and logic:
1. The study of the principles of reasoning, especially of the structure of propositions as distinguished from their content and of method and validity in deductive reasoning.
essentially, logic is the means by which we explain the various phenomenons of the world through deductive reasoning. sound logic is based off of deductive reasoning and observations (facts). however, all logic is based on propositions (axioms) that cannot be proven. for example, we assume that ‘natural laws’ observed here on Earth and as far as we can see into the universe are true throughout the entire universe of existence.
thus, even the soundest logic is based on assumption–on belief without proof or material evidence–on faith.
atheists have looked at the world, and through the use of logic (based on its inherent assumed axioms / faith), and have come to the logical conclusion that there is no god.
so if one were, for whatever reason, to accept the proposition that there is a god, one could use logic to explain the various workings of the universe based on this assumption.
this is why students of religion often call the existence of god a ‘natural law.’ it is one of their axioms at the root of their logic.
is this illogical? if so, why?
one may say that the scientifically accepted axioms have proof through inductive logic–that is, we have observed phenomenons in the universe, and these accepted propositions hold true for what we have seen, so we can assume that they are true everywhere, and thus laws. and that the proposition that there is a god cannot be proven in this way.
however, many people believe that there is substantial evidence–such as ‘miracles’, for example.
so the real root of the disagreement is not flawed logic, but…