Logic vs Deity: does one supersede the other?

It depends on the context. From a religious point of view, man is subject to the divine law, and therefore is not up to its understanding. In such case, logics, science, math et.al. are superseded by the divine law.

Does God have to follow logic?

Logic is an attribute of God. God is not subject to logic in the sense that he is beneath it, nor is logic an “invention” of God. God is always utterly logical, because logic is part of who he is. Logic is the set of rules we must follow to think like God thinks, which is to think rightly.

Are Gods hands tied by logic?

Are God’s Hands Tied By Logic? If logic binds all reality, it would appear that God must be bound by logic. Swinburne argues that logic binds only actual human sentences. His case rests on an argument against Platonism, and the assertion that contradictions are incoherent.

Does God transcend logic?

No doubt God does not transcend his own higher level of logic, but He does transcend human reason. A different argument can also be made from creation. Logic, as a thing in the universe, must be something that God created.

What is the relationship between religion and logic?

Put simply, religious individuals are less likely to engage logical processes and be less efficient at detecting reasoning conflicts; therefore, they are more likely to take intuitive answers at face value and this impairs performance on intelligence tests.

Is God logically possible?

Sterba focuses on the further question of whether God is logically compatible with the degree and amount of moral and natural evil that exists in our world. The negative answer he provides marks a new stage in the age-old debate about God’s existence.
Downloads.

What are the laws of logic?

There are three laws upon which all logic is based, and they’re attributed to Aristotle. These laws are the law of identity, law of non-contradiction, and law of the excluded middle. According to the law of identity, if a statement is true, then it must be true.

Is God omnipotent paradox?

In the 11th century, Anselm of Canterbury argues that there are many things that God cannot do, but that nonetheless he counts as omnipotent. Thomas Aquinas advanced a version of the omnipotence paradox by asking whether God could create a triangle with internal angles that did not add up to 180 degrees.

What is the ontological argument for the existence of God?

As an “a priori” argument, the Ontological Argument tries to “prove” the existence of God by establishing the necessity of God’s existence through an explanation of the concept of existence or necessary being . Anselm, Archbishop of Canterbury first set forth the Ontological Argument in the eleventh century.

What is the transcendental argument for God?

The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God (TAG) is the argument that attempts to prove the existence of God by arguing that logic, morals, and science ultimately presuppose a supreme being and that God must therefore be the source of logic and morals.

What is a transcendental experience?

When something is transcendental, it’s beyond ordinary, everyday experience. It might be religious, spiritual, or otherworldly, but if it’s transcendental, it transcends — or goes beyond — the regular physical realm.

What is transcendental idealism in philosophy?

transcendental idealism, also called formalistic idealism, term applied to the epistemology of the 18th-century German philosopher Immanuel Kant, who held that the human self, or transcendental ego, constructs knowledge out of sense impressions and from universal concepts called categories that it imposes upon them.

Does Kant believe in God?

In a work published the year he died, Kant analyzes the core of his theological doctrine into three articles of faith: (1) he believes in one God, who is the causal source of all good in the world; (2) he believes in the possibility of harmonizing God’s purposes with our greatest good; and (3) he believes in human …

What is Kant’s thing-in-itself?

A thing-in-itself (German: Ding an sich) is an object as it is, independent of observation. The concept of thing-in-itself was introduced by Immanuel Kant. The concept led to much controversy among philosophers.

Is Kant an idealist or realist?

Clearly, transcendental idealism and empirical realism are not at the forefront of today’s debates over realism. For many years even Kant scholarship has ignored the fact that Kant is not only a self-declared idealist but also a self-declared realist.

Was Kant a liberal?

Kant’s political philosophy has been described as liberal for its presumption of limits on the state based on the social contract as a regulative matter.

Is metaphysics possible for Kant?

From this Kant concludes that metaphysics is indeed possible in the sense that we can have a priori knowledge that the entire sensible world – not just our actual experience, but any possible human experience – necessarily conforms to certain laws.

What is the transcendental ego?

transcendental ego, the self that is necessary in order for there to be a unified empirical self-consciousness. For Immanuel Kant, it synthesizes sensations according to the categories of the understanding. Nothing can be known of this self, because it is a condition, not an object, of knowledge.

What is the pure ego?

(Chiefly in phenomenological thought) the essential, transcendental self that exists prior to, and is unchanged by, experience.

What was Kant’s religion?

Kant was born on 22 April 1724 into a Prussian German family of Lutheran Protestant faith in Königsberg, East Prussia. Baptized Emanuel, he later changed the spelling of his name to Immanuel after learning Hebrew.

Related posts:

Does Heidegger really think we need certainty to act? Is he right to? What are the current theories about instinct in philosophy of the mind? Do all epistemologies suffer from the “regress of justifications” problem? Marriage, age and temperance in Plato’s Republic? Is al-Farabi right that predicates must add information and existence is not a predicate? What is the fallacy that agreeing with one point with someone means that you agree with everything else that person says? Validity and Soundness? Standard Argument against free will rebuttal? Consolation for failure or fear of failure? What is the current state of translation of Hegel’s Lectures on the History of Philosophy in English?