The Logic of Religion

[MrBenMcLean]

@Docteur4u Hume's empiricism is controversial, but followers of his epistemology do not hold a monopoly on rationalism. An idea is rational if it conforms to the fundamental laws of thought and it is irrational if it does not. Many different epistemological positions are rational. There are rational theists and irrational ones, just as there are rational atheists and irrational ones too. You may hold that somebody's faith is unreasonable but rationality and faith are not opposed by definition.

[MrBenMcLean]

@Docteur4u I think your definition of "Reason" is flawed, actually you seem to be describing not reason but empiricist epistemology. "Reason" is rational thinking; thinking that conforms to the fundamental laws of rational thought formalized by Aristotle.

[cheesemonkey1990]

@Docteur4u but there is plenty of evidence for the existence of God: both logically and even scientifically. So we have faith IN God (but is not necessary to believe that he exists) and we have our reason to help us understand him a bit better.

[chrismca]

@cheesemonkey1990 Scientific evidence for the existence of a god? As far as I know, definitions of science posit that it deals with the natural world. Wouldn't any proposed god be supernatural?

I don't see how evidence in one of these realms could make the jump to applying to the other.

Can you help me out here?

Cheers

[druss56]

i see how his model for the development of religion applies to, if not comes from the devlopment of Catholic Church. My question is whether or not he is explainig a universal development that applies to most, if not all religions, or if he is specifically talking about the development of the Catholic Church

[cheesemonkey1990]

FIDES ET RATIO!!!!!