Do theists believe in logic?

[editec]

Since it was Satan who introduced us to the pursuit of knowledge, shouldn't devout theists of all stripes denounce critical reasoning and logic as the work of the Devil?

The fall of Adam came from his learning about good and evil, Manifold, not from discoving critical reasoning and logic.

Ya' know, in order for one to logically critique something one must first understand it.

Clearly you don't.

Lucky for me I have you to clear these things up for me.

Yes, you are.

And perhaps in your hurry to lecture me, you didn't realize that this thread was in response to an even more ridiculous one posted earlier in this forum.

I responded to your goofy theory.

You really are a pompous asshole and that's what I love about you!

Possibly, I am.

But nevertheless, your goofy theory about the meaning of the fall of Adam was based on pure ignorance.

One doesn't need to be a believer to understand the basic concepts behind any religion.

But one does to need to know something about it before one can point out its flawed logic

You do not.

 

[ST34]

Logic is rarely black and white

classical logic is basing on values 0, 1 and it is exactly black (false, 0) and white (true, 1) and is ALWAYS black and white, can't you understand so simple truth ?

Aquinas' Catholic God is a helluva far cry from Aristotle's "unmoved mover," though.

Apparently so - but then Aristotle's time had a pantheon of gods while Aquinas was steeped in a tradition of a single god, Aquinas probably had an easier job of it

in time of aristotle monotheistic tendencies in Greece were at least as strong as polytheistic, but probably even stronger - as it shows so called platonism;
in fact 'unmoved mover' of lame-duck aristotle is simple version of monotheistic doctrine of Amenhotep IV, and conception of pip squeak aquinas isn't at all very far echo but only repeats literally idea of lame-duck aristotle - and they both were very far from any logic and any sense

 

[editec]

Perfect logic flowing from flawed premises leads to perfectly logical, but entire incorrect conclusions.

As in the following example

Since it was Satan who introduced us to the pursuit of knowledge, shouldn't devout theists of all stripes denounce critical reasoning and logic as the work of the Devil?

His attempt to begin the discussion based on the Socratic method begins with a premise which is flawed.

The logic of his argument was sound, enough but since his prsupposition was wrong?

Well...you know programmers say about the value of perfect logic, right?

GIGO
(garbage in garbage out)​

 

[manifold]

The fall of Adam came from his learning about good and evil, Manifold, not from discoving critical reasoning and logic.

Ya' know, in order for one to logically critique something one must first understand it.

Clearly you don't.

Yes, you are.



I responded to your goofy theory.

You really are a pompous asshole and that's what I love about you!

Possibly, I am.

But nevertheless, your goofy theory about the meaning of the fall of Adam was based on pure ignorance.

One doesn't need to be a believer to understand the basic concepts behind any religion.

But one does to need to know something about it before one can point out its flawed logic

You do not.

Thanks again!

And there you have it folks. Editec's interpretation of the Bible is the only true intepretation. All hail the prophet Editec.

 

[editec]

Yes, you are.



I responded to your goofy theory.



Possibly, I am.

But nevertheless, your goofy theory about the meaning of the fall of Adam was based on pure ignorance.

One doesn't need to be a believer to understand the basic concepts behind any religion.

But one does to need to know something about it before one can point out its flawed logic

You do not.

Thanks again!

And there you have it folks. Editec's interpretation of the Bible is the only true intepretation. All hail the prophet Editec.

It's hardly my interpretation of the the fall of Adam and what it meant, lad.

The fact that you suppose it is, is still another example of how far out of your depth you are in this discussion.

 

[JBeukema]

Perfect logic flowing from flawed premises leads to perfectly logical, but entire incorrect conclusions.

As in the following example

Since it was Satan who introduced us to the pursuit of knowledge, shouldn't devout theists of all stripes denounce critical reasoning and logic as the work of the Devil?

His attempt to begin the discussion based on the Socratic method begins with a premise which is flawed.

The logic of his argument was sound, enough but since his prsupposition was wrong?

Well...you know programmers say about the value of perfect logic, right?

GIGO
(garbage in garbage out)​

Actually, that logic is not sound. The flaw lies with an invalid axiom- the presumption that 't was Satan who introduced us to the pursuit of knowledge'. Now manifold MUST PROVE THAT TO BE THE CASE

 

[manifold]

It's hardly my interpretation of the the fall of Adam and what it meant, lad.

The fact that you suppose it is, is still another example of how far out of your depth you are in this discussion.

lad?

More condescending bullshit from mister know-it-all.

So tell me, is it not possible that knowledge of good and evil is the foundation for all knowledge? Or to put it another way, if Eden truly was as it is described, what need would there have been for critical reason and logic? I can't think of any. But once Adam and Eve were cast out and forced to fend for themselves for survival, reason and logic became critically important.

I think what is going on here is far less about me being out of my depth and a lot more about your inability to keep an open mind about anything.

 

[JBeukema]

Since it was Satan who introduced us to the pursuit of knowledge, shouldn't devout theists of all stripes denounce critical reasoning and logic as the work of the Devil?

only jews, xtians, and muslims....


and they do.

A few gems from Martin Luther



Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.

Reason is the greatest enemy that faith has: it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but--more frequently than not --struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God.

* 353. (Table Talk)

Reason must be deluded, blinded, and destroyed. Faith must trample underfoot all reason, sense, and understanding, and whatever it sees must be put out of sight and ... know nothing but the word of God.

Whoever wants to be a Christian should tear the eyes out of his reason.


Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding.

# Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has.
# Reason is the enemy of faith.

But since the devil’s bride, Reason, that pretty whore, comes in and thinks she’s wise, and what she says, what she thinks, is from the Holy Spirit, who can help us, then? Not judges, not doctors, no king or emperor, because [reason] is the Devil’s greatest whore
(artin Luther’s Last Sermon in Wittenberg … Second Sunday in Epiphany, 17 January 1546. Dr. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe. (Weimar: Herman Boehlaus Nachfolger, 1914), Band 51:126, Line 7ff)

 

[Ravi]

Welllll...they'd at least need enough critical reasoning and logic to avoid committing incest.

 

[manifold]

Actually, that logic is not sound. The flaw lies with an invalid axiom- the presumption that 't was Satan who introduced us to the pursuit of knowledge'. Now manifold MUST PROVE THAT TO BE THE CASE

The entire point presupposes that the story of Adam and Eve is true you stupid asshat. If such a hypothetical is too difficult for you to hang with then maybe you should go back to nipping at Gunny's heels.

 

[JBeukema]

The entire point presupposes that the story of Adam and Eve is true you stupid asshat:

Invalid. It is not self-evident and it has not been demonstrated.

 

[manifold]

The entire point presupposes that the story of Adam and Eve is true you stupid asshat:

Invalid. It is not self-evident and it has not been demonstrated.

So the entire basis of your disagreement rests on the fact that I didn't preface the OP with "Assuming that the biblical story about Adam and Eve is true..."

Wow! You're a fucking debate genius.

 

[AllieBaba]

Manifold must be having inadequacy issues today. His universal argument lately has been that everyone (except for himself) is stupid.

 

[manifold]

Good one Allie, did you come up with that one all on your own? Regardless, the next time I see you demonstrate even the slighest ability to think logically will be the first. But you know what they say, if at the first 100,000 times you don't succeed, try try again.

 

[del]

this thread's hilarious


and then some

 

[manifold]

thank you... err, I mean you're welcome.

 

[garyd]

The quality of one's logic is wholly dependent upon the qulaity of the information and the quality of the means by which said information is acquired. The closer you get to the edges the less sure one can be of anything.

All of science rest upon unproven and inherently unprovable assumptions.

In order for one's logic to be pefect one most be at least two of the three omni's to wit omniscient and omnipresent.

 

[editec]

It's hardly my interpretation of the the fall of Adam and what it meant, lad.

The fact that you suppose it is, is still another example of how far out of your depth you are in this discussion.

lad?

More condescending bullshit from mister know-it-all.

So tell me, is it not possible that knowledge of good and evil is the foundation for all knowledge? Or to put it another way, if Eden truly was as it is described, what need would there have been for critical reason and logic? I can't think of any. But once Adam and Eve were cast out and forced to fend for themselves for survival, reason and logic became critically important.

I think what is going on here is far less about me being out of my depth and a lot more about your inability to keep an open mind about anything.

Yeah I suppose that one could make the a tortured argument that the recognition of good and evil demands logic.

But if one makes that argument, then everything demands logic..not just determining the good or evil of a situation.

Logic is a necessary thing in cases where no moral issue is at stake, too.

Assume one wants to get an apple out of a tree.

One employs logic to achieve that task.

Good and evil in that case?

Not really part of the issue.

If we are going to assume that Adam lived in the garden of Eden, we also have to assume that he still used logic to get through his day to day activities before he and eve recognized things as either good or evil.

Almost nothing we do, doesn't demand some logic to get it done.

Not even in Eden before the Fall of Adam.

 

[KittenKoder]

Good and evil is subjective.

 

[editec]

Good and evil is subjective.

Exactly right.

Unless one believes that GOD defines them, then good and evil is subjective because GOD is the subject defining them.