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
"What's an easy way to demonstrate that polytheism is false?"
If two equally sovereign creator gods disagree on any point, noncontradiction is no longer a valid test of truth. Without noncontradiction, there can be no test of truth at all, and rational thought goes out the window. But the problem is worse than that. Since the gods are equally sovereign, neither is in control of the other one. This means that neither one can guarantee the behavior of the other one.
Continue reading...
"Regarding your answer to Lev 11:13-19... Rather disingenuous of you don't you think? The list is a list of birds (apart from bats) so the writer (god?) meant "birds", not "insects" or "flying things"."
I don't think it was disingenuous in the slightest, but thanks for asking. Here is your argument as I understood it: 1. The 1500 BC Hebrew word "'owph" has to have the exact same meaning as the 21st century English taxonomical classification "Aves". 2. The 1500 BC Hebrew word "'atalleph" has to have the exact same meaning as the 21st century English taxonomical classification "Chiroptera". 3.
Continue reading...
"Why does God require an argument to defend it, unlike something obvious like gravity for example?"
According to the Bible, God does not require an argument to prove His existence to anyone; rather, everyone is inherently already well aware of His existence, because He has made us aware. Romans 1, verses 18-20 state, "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
Continue reading...