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
"Why do Christians accept the Torah?"
Christians accept the Pentateuch and the rest of the Old Testament because Jesus, who is God in the flesh, accepts and teaches them (Matthew 4:4, 4:7, 4:10, 8:4; Mark 7:10, 10:2-3, 12:26; Luke 16:31, 20:37, 24:27, 24:44; John 1:45, 3:14, 5:45-46, 7:22). Jesus was born into the tribe of Judah, a legal descendent of King David of Israel, as a fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy (1 Kings 9:5; Luke 1:32).
Continue reading...
"Since there can be no evidence for something that can't be measured, is it at least fair to say that there is no empirical evidence for god, and therefore no reason to believe he exists?"
If there is no reason to believe something that can't be measured, why would anyone believe that "there is no reason to believe something that can't be measured"? This argument is self-defeating. If we accept it, we must apply it to itself. Once we apply it to itself, we see that it does not meet its own criteria. Then, we must reject it. In other words, if we accept your argument, we must reject your argument on its own terms. I hope this is clear. God bless.
Continue reading...
"If God is "just is", then why can't the universe "just be"?"
God has made it clear that this is not the case (Genesis 1:1, 2:4; Isaiah 42:5, 45:8, 45:18; Ephesians 3:9; Colossians 1:16; Revelation 4:11, 10:6), and since He is perfectly knowledgeable (Job 37:16; Psalm 147:5; Isaiah 46:9-10; John 21:17; 1 John 3:20), perfectly honest (Exodus 34:6; 2 Samuel 7:28; Psalm 31:5, 57:10; John 1:14, 1:17, 14:6; Ephesians 4:21; Hebrews 6:18), and perfectly sovereign (1 Chronicles 29:14; Job 41:11; Psalm 119:91, 135:6; Ecclesiastes 11:5; Mark 10:27; John 1:3, 5:44;...
Continue reading...