|
Transcendental Argument
The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God (TAG) is the argument that attempts to prove the existence of God by arguing that logic, morality, morals, and science ultimately presupposition, presuppose a supreme being and that God must therefore be the source of logic and morals. A version was formulated by Immanuel Kant in his 1763 work ''The Only Possible Argument in Support of a Demonstration of the Existence of God'', and most contemporary formulations of the transcendental argument have been developed within the logical framework, framework of Christianity, Christian presuppositional apologetics. Transcendental reasoning Transcendental arguments should not be confused with arguments for the existence of something Transcendence (religion), transcendent. In other words, they are distinct from both arguments that appeal to a transcendent intuition or sense as evidence, and Christian apologetics#Historical and legal evidentialism, classical apologetics arguments that move ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Argument
An argument is a statement or group of statements called premises intended to determine the degree of truth or acceptability of another statement called conclusion. Arguments can be studied from three main perspectives: the logical, the dialectical and the rhetorical perspective. In logic, an argument is usually expressed not in natural language but in a symbolic formal language, and it can be defined as any group of propositions of which one is claimed to follow from the others through deductively valid inferences that preserve truth from the premises to the conclusion. This logical perspective on argument is relevant for scientific fields such as mathematics and computer science. Logic is the study of the forms of reasoning in arguments and the development of standards and criteria to evaluate arguments. Deductive arguments can be valid, and the valid ones can be sound: in a valid argument, premisses necessitate the conclusion, even if one or more of the premises is false ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Inductive Reasoning
Inductive reasoning is a method of reasoning in which a general principle is derived from a body of observations. It consists of making broad generalizations based on specific observations. Inductive reasoning is distinct from ''deductive'' reasoning. If the premises are correct, the conclusion of a deductive argument is ''certain''; in contrast, the truth of the conclusion of an inductive argument is '' probable'', based upon the evidence given. Types The types of inductive reasoning include generalization, prediction, statistical syllogism, argument from analogy, and causal inference. Inductive generalization A generalization (more accurately, an ''inductive generalization'') proceeds from a premise about a sample to a conclusion about the population. The observation obtained from this sample is projected onto the broader population. : The proportion Q of the sample has attribute A. : Therefore, the proportion Q of the population has attribute A. For example, say there ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Argument From Morality
The argument from morality is an argument for the existence of God. Arguments from morality tend to be based on moral normativity or moral order. Arguments from moral normativity observe some aspect of morality and argue that God is the best or only explanation for this, concluding that God must exist. Arguments from moral order are based on the asserted need for moral order to exist in the universe. They claim that, for this moral order to exist, God must exist to support it. The argument from morality is noteworthy in that one cannot evaluate the soundness of the argument without attending to almost every important philosophical issue in meta-ethics. German philosopher Immanuel Kant devised an argument from morality based on practical reason. Kant argued that the goal of humanity is to achieve perfect happiness and virtue (the summum bonum) and believed that an afterlife must exist in order for this to be possible, and that God must exist to provide this. In his book ''Mer ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Gödel's Ontological Proof
Gödel's ontological proof is a formal argument by the mathematician Kurt Gödel (1906–1978) for the existence of God. The argument is in a line of development that goes back to Anselm of Canterbury (1033–1109). St. Anselm's ontological argument, in its most succinct form, is as follows: "God, by definition, is that for which no greater can be conceived. God exists in the understanding. If God exists in the understanding, we could imagine Him to be greater by existing in reality. Therefore, God must exist." A more elaborate version was given by Gottfried Leibniz (1646–1716); this is the version that Gödel studied and attempted to clarify with his ontological argument. Gödel left a fourteen-point outline of his philosophical beliefs in his papers. Points relevant to the ontological proof include :4. There are other worlds and rational beings of a different and higher kind. :5. The world in which we live is not the only one in which we shall live or have lived. :13. There is ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Propositional Calculus
Propositional calculus is a branch of logic. It is also called propositional logic, statement logic, sentential calculus, sentential logic, or sometimes zeroth-order logic. It deals with propositions (which can be true or false) and relations between propositions, including the construction of arguments based on them. Compound propositions are formed by connecting propositions by logical connectives. Propositions that contain no logical connectives are called atomic propositions. Unlike first-order logic, propositional logic does not deal with non-logical objects, predicates about them, or Quantifier (logic), quantifiers. However, all the machinery of propositional logic is included in first-order logic and higher-order logics. In this sense, propositional logic is the foundation of first-order logic and higher-order logic. Explanation Logical connectives are found in natural languages. In English for example, some examples are "and" (logical conjunction, conjunction), "or" (lo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Soundness
In logic or, more precisely, deductive reasoning, an argument is sound if it is both valid in form and its premises are true. Soundness also has a related meaning in mathematical logic, wherein logical systems are sound if and only if every formula that can be proved in the system is logically valid with respect to the semantics of the system. Definition In deductive reasoning, a sound argument is an argument that is valid and all of its premises are true (and as a consequence its conclusion is true as well). An argument is valid if, assuming its premises are true, the conclusion ''must'' be true. An example of a sound argument is the following well-known syllogism: : ''(premises)'' : All men are mortal. : Socrates is a man. : ''(conclusion)'' : Therefore, Socrates is mortal. Because of the logical necessity of the conclusion, this argument is valid; and because the argument is valid and its premises are true, the argument is sound. However, an argument can be valid without ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Gödel's Completeness Theorem
Gödel's completeness theorem is a fundamental theorem in mathematical logic that establishes a correspondence between semantic truth and syntactic provability in first-order logic. The completeness theorem applies to any first-order theory: If ''T'' is such a theory, and φ is a sentence (in the same language) and every model of ''T'' is a model of φ, then there is a (first-order) proof of φ using the statements of ''T'' as axioms. One sometimes says this as "anything universally true is provable". This does not contradict Gödel's incompleteness theorem, which shows that some formula φu is unprovable although true in the natural numbers, which are a particular model of a first-order theory describing them — φu is just false in some other model of the first-order theory being considered (such as a non-standard model of arithmetic for Peano arithmetic). It makes a close link between model theory that deals with what is true in different models, and proof theory tha ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Non-classical Logic
Non-classical logics (and sometimes alternative logics) are formal systems that differ in a significant way from standard logical systems such as propositional and predicate logic. There are several ways in which this is done, including by way of extensions, deviations, and variations. The aim of these departures is to make it possible to construct different models of logical consequence and logical truth. Philosophical logic is understood to encompass and focus on non-classical logics, although the term has other meanings as well. In addition, some parts of theoretical computer science can be thought of as using non-classical reasoning, although this varies according to the subject area. For example, the basic boolean functions (e.g. AND, OR, NOT, etc) in computer science are very much classical in nature, as is clearly the case given that they can be fully described by classical truth tables. However, in contrast, some computerized proof methods may not use classical logic i ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Evidentialist
Evidentialism is a thesis in epistemology which states that one is justified to believe something if and only if that person has evidence which supports said belief. Evidentialism is, therefore, a thesis about which beliefs are justified and which are not. Evidentialism enjoys wide popular support and has for centuries. Perhaps the earliest known proponents of evidentialism is David Hume who said "A wise man apportions his beliefs to the evidence." Similarly, Hitchens's Razor states "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." Carl Sagan has also stated "Extraordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence." All of these statements imply acceptance of philosophical evidentialism. For philosophers Richard Feldman and Earl Conee, evidentialism is the strongest argument for justification because it identifies the primary notion of epistemic justification. They argue that if a person's attitude towards a proposition fits their evidence, then their dox ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Thomistic
Thomism is the philosophical and theological school that arose as a legacy of the work and thought of Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), the Dominican philosopher, theologian, and Doctor of the Church. In philosophy, Aquinas' disputed questions and commentaries on Aristotle are perhaps his best-known works. In theology, his ''Summa Theologica'' is amongst the most influential documents in medieval theology and continues to be the central point of reference for the philosophy and theology of the Catholic Church. In the 1914 motu proprio ''Doctoris Angelici'', Pope Pius X cautioned that the teachings of the Church cannot be understood without the basic philosophical underpinnings of Aquinas' major theses: Overview Thomas Aquinas held and practiced the principle that truth is to be accepted no matter where it is found. His doctrines drew from Greek, Roman, Islamic and Jewish philosophers. Specifically, he was a realist (i.e. unlike skeptics, he believed that the world can ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Cornelius Van Til
Cornelius Van Til (May 3, 1895 – April 17, 1987) was a Dutch-American reformed philosopher and theologian, who is credited as being the originator of modern presuppositional apologetics. A graduate of Calvin College, Van Til later received his PhD from Princeton University. After teaching at Princeton, he went on to help found Westminster Theological Seminary where he taught until his retirement. Van Til and his work heavily influenced Reconstructionist theologians like Greg Bahnsen and R.J. Rushdoony. Biography Van Til (born Kornelis van Til in Grootegast, Netherlands) was the sixth son of Ite van Til, a dairy farmer, and his wife Klasina van der Veen. At the age of ten, he moved with his family to Highland, Indiana. He was the first of his family to receive a higher education. In 1914 he attended Calvin Preparatory School, graduated from Calvin College, and attended one year at Calvin Theological Seminary, where he studied under Louis Berkhof, but he transferred to P ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Al-Ashari
Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī (; full name: ''Abū al-Ḥasan ʿAlī ibn Ismāʿīl ibn Isḥāq al-Ashʿarī''; c. 874–936 CE/260–324 AH), often reverently referred to as Imām al-Ashʿarī by Sunnī Muslims, was an Arab Muslim scholar of Maliki jurisprudence, scriptural exegete, reformer (''mujaddid''), and scholastic theologian (''mutakallim''), renowned for being the eponymous founder of the Ashʿarite school of Islamic theology. Al-Ashʿarī was notable for taking an intermediary position between the two diametrically opposed schools of Islamic theology prevalent at the time: Aṯharī and Muʿtazila. He primarily opposed the Muʿtazilite theologians, who advocated the use of rationalism in theological debate and believed that the Quran was created (''makhlūq''), as opposed to it being uncreated. On the other hand, the Ḥanbalites and '' Muḥaddithīn'' exclusively relied upon the strict adherence to literalism and the outward ('' ẓāhir'') meaning of ex ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.svg "Click for more on -> Argument")
.jpg "Click for more on -> Argument From Morality")
