the Website of Timothy McCabe Follower of Christ; Student of Epistemology, Apologetics, and Theology
Home Good News Proofs Questions Presentations Software More

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

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!

 

World Religions and Cults (volume 2)

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

"Why are books of faith, such as the Bible or Koran, seething with so much violence? Do you think that there is a relationship between the violence that has been perpetrated in the name of religion and the books of faith?"

The word "violence" often carries with it a connotation of evil. However, the definition of the word does not necessitate any kind of moral association. According to dictionary.com, the first definition of violence is "swift and intense force". Thus, we could comfortably say that a batter hits a baseball with violence, or a carpenter drives a nail into a piece of wood with violence. I can think of no one who would find these violent tasks to be inherently evil.
Continue reading...

"Is there a question to which you all would give the same - or almost the same - answer?"

I certainly can't speak authoritatively for the opinion of anyone other than myself, but it seems to me that everyone can easily be convinced to agree that if something is, then it is; and also that nothing can both be and not be at the same time and in the same way. In other words, the Laws of Logic are valid. An interesting point to note, however, is that holding to the Laws of Logic can only be rationally justified under Christian assumptions.
Continue reading...

"The Quran does not say the tree was a tree of knowledge, but the Bible does. The Bible also makes Adam's deed a sin, Quran says not. Why is acquiring knowledge a sin in your book, and why is it so bad all subsequent generations are supposedly damned?"

Genesis 2:16-17 The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die." The tree was indeed a tree of knowledge according to the Bible. However, it was not just any kind of knowledge -- it was, specifically, "knowledge of good and evil".
Continue reading...

All articles