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
"Does the biblical god "YHWH" tempt? Because it says in Gen. 22:11 that God tempted Abraham, and in James 1:13 it says "God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man? Which should I believe?"
Here are the verses in question from the NASB: Genesis 22:1 Now it came about after these things, that God tested (KJV - "did tempt") Abraham, and said to him, "Abraham!" And he said, "Here I am." James 1:13 Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am being tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone.
Continue reading...
"Your god, in his own holy book, admits to having created evil (Isaiah 45:7). Why then should I worship him?"
In Isaiah 45:7, the KJV translates the Hebrew word "rah" as "evil". More modern English translations often opt for the word "calamity" instead. Either one of these translations is viable and could be the intended meaning of the passage. However, that God is ultimately the Uncaused First Cause of all sinful actions is clear from both scripture and reason, so even if the verse cited does not make the point, the general concept behind the question remains.
Continue reading...
"Since there can be no evidence for something that can't be measured, is it at least fair to say that there is no empirical evidence for god, and therefore no reason to believe he exists?"
If there is no reason to believe something that can't be measured, why would anyone believe that "there is no reason to believe something that can't be measured"? This argument is self-defeating. If we accept it, we must apply it to itself. Once we apply it to itself, we see that it does not meet its own criteria. Then, we must reject it. In other words, if we accept your argument, we must reject your argument on its own terms. I hope this is clear. God bless.
Continue reading...