Logic and religion -- FawnDoo's Cavalcade of Whimsy

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 21:45:13 04/12/03 Sat
Author: Perceptor II
Subject: Logic and religion
In reply to: Goktimus Prime 's message, "And?" on 09:29:24 04/12/03 Sat

Sorry, but God's Law is not acceptable in an academic argument IMO. Unlike scientific law, God's Law has no real logical/rational backing. It is merely the rules and opinions of one institution. You cannot argue that something is wrong just because a certain group of people believe it to be wrong without having a logical/rational justification to back it up.

This pretty much illustrates why attempts at "logical" debate on religious subjects is pretty much fruitless. No one arrives at their reigious beliefs logically. The basis of one's religious (or lack of religious) beliefs occupies an area where logic has yet to be applied. (This area is referred as "religion" or "personal religion" by some psychologists, though it is a distinct phenomenon from what is usually meant by that term: "organized religion".) It is alogical. It neither applies logic nor is it contrary to logic. More precisely, it is prelogical. Any logical reasoning becomes based upon the premises that are established pre-logically, axiomatically, "by faith".

I have also observed that a common practice among those who like to debate religion is to ask a question of those who have different religious beliefs, and then when those questioned explain their logical the one who asked the question will declare their line of reasoning to be invalid due to the fact that they include their religious beliefs. Essentially, the questioner is never really interested in understanding where the other side is coming from, just in inflating his own ego. All that's accomplished from such "debates" is a lot of angry feelings, a lot of yelling, and one or two people getting swelled heads.

So, hopefully you will understand my disgust and my desire to step away from this debate.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

declaring reason -- Goktimus Prime, 02:36:08 04/13/03 Sun
- Perceptor has a point. -- WarCore, 03:35:07 04/13/03 Sun
- My ONLY commentary on this thread -- Icon, 13:53:38 04/15/03 Tue