If logic is a man-made process, what makes it better than religion?

Question

Does your outlook on life determine how you define 'proof' or 'lack of proof'?

Example:

Christian sees a newborn baby:

"What a wonderful gift from God!"

Atheist sees a newborn baby:

"It keeps the breeding process moving along.."

(two questions)

How do you do?
------------

I'm good. Answer the questions.

logic isnt man made. we dont "create" logic. we "have" logic. like we have eyes, we dont create eyes.
------------------------

I didn't create faith; I have it. Are we on the same page?

Religion uses faith instead of facts.
------------------------

And what (and who) determines what a fact is?

Answer 1

logic isnt man made. we dont "create" logic. we "have" logic. like we have eyes, we dont create eyes.

christians say baby's are gift from gods, but they arent. they are created from man and woman, a gift from sex if anything.

Answer 2

There are different forms of logic. Pure logic has its origin in the mind of the Creator.

Human logic is not better than religion because human logic is a form of religion where human reasoning is reverenced somewhat like a god.

Human logic does not always work and cannot be applied to anything that supersedes its boundaries such as God.

If one accepts God's premise of sin to be true, then the human mind is flawed and consequently human reasoning apart from God's guidance will be misleading.

Here is a good example.

MORSE CODE = invented by Samuel F.B. Morse

DNA CODE = invented by time and chance (human logic)

The logic of the Bible is of a higher order. True Christians have an appreciation for this simple fact.

Those who regard the Bible as not based upon logic are blinded by the flawed reasoning which that very same Bible points out.

Within the Bible are revealed principles and laws governing physiology and anatomy, psychological development, sociology, behavioral development, moral excellence and much, much more.

The prejudice of an inherently sinful mind is insufficient however to discern these things.

Show N Tell

Answer 3

Ummm... You are confusing method with results :)
Newborn child doesn't prove neither religion nor atheism.
Unlike vies that you described for newborn child case, logic is objective not subjective.

Classic logic is basically just a set of rules that tells us how we can derive the accuracy of statements from one another.
It's like maths, in decimal, in agreed-upon symbol set 2 + 2 = 4 and opinions can't make it 5.
If you start from assuming that we use trinary, however, 2 + 2 = 11 by the same laws of mathematics.
If you say "2" means five in your world, then 2+2 will be ten by the same rules.


It depends on where you start.
The point of logic is that it's valid regardless of who uses it and for what; the question is, where do you start? E.g. what do you consider facts from which you derive conclusions?

That's how ID concept appeared - it's trying to introduce *some* logic into creationists' blah-blah. You cannot prove "accurate" god using about anything in the Universe, but you can try to prove that stuff was CREATED by some agent using some facts' misinterpretation and selective evidence.
The logic behind the "proof" however is just the same :)

Answer 4

Logic: 1. the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.
2. a particular method of reasoning or argumentation:
3. the system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study.
4. reason or sound judgment, as in utterances or actions:
5. convincing forcefulness; inexorable truth or persuasiveness:

Because logic is based on truth and facts, and religion is based on what a book that has been written by man thousands of years ago about some guy in the sky playing science expermient.

How do we define proof?: evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, (or to produce belief in its truth.)....the same way webster does.

and what is a fact?: something that actually exists; reality; truth

In conclusion, friend logic can be proven with fact. Or disproven with fact in some cases. However the point remains that with logic the theory can be proven and disproven. Religion and your hairbrained theories can not be proven or disproven. In fact most of the time contradicts itself.

That is what makes logic better than religion

Is there an intelligent man or woman now in the world who believes in the bible? If you find anyone who believes it, hit his forehead and you will hear an echo. Something is for rent.

Answer 5

Your perception of how an atheist would see a newborn baby is flawed. They have feelings and joy as much as us Christians do. The "logical" reaction to seeing a newborn baby is different than what you are presenting here in an attempt to make your argument. I think you can do better than this.

I propose this argument in response to yours: is the God you believe in a random, arbitrary God? Or is he a rational and logical God? In other words, there are reasons that God does things. Logic is NOT man-made, anymore than math or science is. I think that is a fair statement for anyone, religious or not. I would argue that the experience of joy at seeing a newborn baby is natural, rational, and logical. Thus an atheist person would feel the same as a religious person. They would just not give credit to God for it.

So ultimately your problem comes down to this: does a person believe in God or not? If they do, then wonderful. I believe in God, and I think that's great. However, who am I to question the beliefs of an atheist? How can I prove that God exists by putting them down or trying to concoct supposedly logical arguments against them? That is what some of them try to do to me, and it doesn't work. Why would I think that it would work the other way around? Fact is that most atheists I know are really good people. The best way you can show them whether or not God exists is to set a good example for them, but it will be hard to do. A lot of atheists I know are better people than some of the Christians I know. What a shame.

Answer 6

Logic is a way of thinking.

It means using evidence and clear thinking to establish patterns and explain the world around us.

Logic helps with coherence, if there is no coherence, nothing is understandable.

It isn't "man made".

There are some rules / proofs / laws of logic that help with the ANSWERS gained from logic... For instance, the Law of Non-Contradiction. A cannot be both A and non-A at the same time and in the same relationship....

Answer 7

My outlook on life is not completely logic based. I have many illogical mannerisms. I smoke, I occasionally drink, I spend time on Yahoo Answers.

My outlook of the Universe is driven by logic, I learn from brilliant scientist that have brought to focus the origin's of the universe, how our species have evolved, how Mathematics can be applied to produce real results. Religion can not be applied to produce real results, religion can not be used to build a cell phone, or to explain with any accuracy how things work.

When I look into the eyes of my baby I think she is the most precious thing in the world. I devout all of my love to her. I do not look at her as though she were just another process. She is a human being, she is capable of reasoning, she is capable of love. We atheists are not so inhumane as some theists would leave you to believe.

Answer 8

Logic is based on using what is KNOWN. Religion tends to use what is unknown, and assumption, for support.

Christian: We can't explain everything, therefore God!

Rational person: We don't know everything, but that doesn't mean we can jump to conclusions. We should seek truth, not hear an answer that appeals to us, and assume it's true, for no other reason.

Added: "Who and what decides what a fact is?" A fact is something that can be applied for a real, observable result. Want to figure out the difference? Next time you walk into a dark room, instead of turning on a light switch, try praying for light, and see what happens. The light switch/light bulb are scientific inventions, based on FACTS. That's why there is no question to their effectiveness and existence.

Answer 9

Logic is more 'palatable' becuase it is with the realm of what can be seen, touched, etc. It is a way of explaining what we already know to exist because it is something that we tangibly discovered. Religion, on the other hand, deals with things that we did not find ourselves, and there is no way of knowing whether or not we are right about it. This is not to say there is no right or wrong, just that we don't know for sure what it is. Most people like everything in a nice little box, easily seen and understood. Logic fits in that little box, but religion doesn't.

Answer 10

Doug you've got some good questions. I would say nothing. But scripture says "...let God be true, but every man a liar..." (Romans 3:4). Men can simply make a set of rules that are relative to what a society values at a specific time, then again change them when they don't suit him anymore. 100 years ago we never would have thought of allowing homosexuals to marry; many of our best minds say we're more enlightened now. Is this true? I beg to differ.

In the 1940 a group of people called the Nazi's deemed that it was acceptable in their society to kill Jews, handicapped, and others they deemed undesirable. What has changed in 60 years. We are all humans and are only one step away from committing the same atrocities our forefathers committed.

All man made processes are corrupt and polluted. How can we get anything clean and decent out of men who are corrupt and filthy. We have no intelligent option but God. For his Word is flawless.

Answer 11

Religion is definitely man-made. Logic is definitely not man-made, but is inherent. Man merely discovered logic. It is much like discovering a process, then refining it. The refining part is absolutely due to our inherent perception of not being all-knowing. One of the commenters here says that science is used to prove things to be true. Science cannot prove anything due to it's inductive nature. Science only serves as one tool in the belt. It can observe and be used to create theories, but can never prove anything outright.