Rationalism
Definition
Rationalism describes any philosophy that claims that beliefs and opinions should always be logical, deductive conclusions rather than being based on experience, observations, religious teachings, or divine revelation.
Keywords: Rationalism, Philosophy, Logical, Reasoning, Deductive, Experience, Observations, Religious, Revelation, Contradictory.
Veracity
Rationalistic claims are false .
Proof
All self-refuting or contradictory claims are deductively false.
Premise 1: Only deductive conclusions should be believed.
Premise 2: Premise 1, being the foundation or starting point of the philosophy, is not itself a deductive conclusion.
Conclusion: Therefore, premise 1, also known as "rationalism", should not be believed.
Rationalistic claims, when adhered to, require the rejection of rationalistic claims. To accept them is to reject them, making rationalism inherently contradictory and deductively false.
Gilbert Guttlebocker, Defender of Dragons
Riveting, yet absurd; romantic, yet innocent; Gilbert Guttlebocker, Defender of Dragons is a little Roald Dahl, a little Harry Potter, and a little Chronicles of Narnia, all rolled into one. Timothy McCabe collaborates with the great Benedict Ballyhoot to bring you the novel of the century!
In Printed Form
Along with numerous other authors including Don Landis, Bodie Hodge and Roger Patterson, Timothy McCabe contributes analyses of various world religions and cults in this volume from Master Books.
Other Writings
"Did God have to be created? Why or why not?"
God was not created. If something is created, then it is necessarily temporal -- in other words, it changes over time. Specifically, it must begin to exist, and "beginning" is itself a temporal process. However, since the only things that are infinite are things that have no end, and since past time has ended, we can say with certainty that past time is not infinite, which means that past time had a beginning.
Continue reading...
"If there is a God, but there is no evidence to be found for his existence except subjective experiences, is it not reasonable to assume that if he does exist, he does not want us to know about it?"
The conclusion does not seem reasonable to me. First, the premise is very unclear, and I will explain what I mean. Second, in the only way I can see that the premise could be considered true, the conclusion does not seem to be reasonably based on it. AN UNCLEAR PREMISE First, the premise seems unclear in that it seems to suggest that evidence is the only way to justifiably be convinced of something. But note that rational thought cannot exist without reason behind it.
Continue reading...
"If God created everything and decided how it would be, wouldn't our sins be his fault?"
The word "fault" means a defect or an imperfection. God has no defects or imperfections, and it is nonsensical to suggest that the contrary could be true, for if God had defects or imperfections, they would not be recognized as defects or imperfections by anyone, including Him, and thus to call them defects or imperfections would be utterly meaningless. Further, if God were anything other than perfect-in-every-way, nothing could be trusted at all since He is the source of everything.
Continue reading...