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
"If God is all-powerful and can do anything and everything, can he build a wall high enough so that he could not jump over it?"
No. The God of the Bible is incapable of numerous things. Essentially, all of these things are summed up in 2 Timothy 2:13 which states that God "cannot deny Himself". The God of scripture is a logical God, which is the only reason why the laws of logic, such as the law of non-contradiction, can be trusted to be universal and invariant.
Continue reading...
"Could Christ have prevented his alleged crucifixion? If he could have but didn't, wasn't that suicide?"
"Could Christ have prevented his alleged crucifixion?" Generally, this type of question, "could someone have done other than what they did?" ultimately means, "was there a point at which the singular cause of the event was the will of the person involved?" If I have correctly understood the intent of the questioner, the answer is absolutely (John 10:18). "If he could have but didn't, wasn't that suicide?
Continue reading...
"Can you know anything independently of what god has revealed to you?"
The short answer is no. But depending on exactly how the words in the question are defined, that could make a difference in how the question is answered. KNOWLEDGE Knowledge is generally understood to at least require justified, true belief. It may entail more than that, but it at least requires those elements. What this means is that if someone is justified in believing something, but that something is false, then it cannot correctly be said that they "know" it.
Continue reading...