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

"What unique evidence is there for your religion or worldview? Can you prove that what you say is true?"

In the words of the late Greg Bahnsen, the most basic proof of Christianity is that if it were not true, it would be impossible to prove anything at all. If the non-Christian worldview is true, the laws of logic are not valid. Therefore, even though non-Christians use logic to interpret evidence, they have no real justification for doing so. In the non-Christian worldview, logic is not something that can be trusted.
Continue reading...

"Deut 18:18 - KJV says "bretheren": Muhammad was an Ishmaelite, therefore a bretheren. 1Jhn 4:1 says Muhammad praised Jesus without knowledge of him as Deut 18:18 says the words were put into his mouth. But if it is an Israeli prophet, why not David?"

I've merged several of your questions together, since they all seem to be referring to the same thing. That way I can address them all at once. For future reference, if you are asking a question for a specific worldview on this website, such as Christianity, please make certain to select that worldview in the drop down list on the ASK A QUESTION page, so that the wrong people are not asked the intended question. Thanks for your care in this.
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...

All articles