For some reason, some folks think that logic couldn’t exist without God. They say that the laws of logic are absolute. Often, they cite some as examples yet obviously know nothing about them.

For instance, some will invoke the law of non contradiction yet have no idea what an antinomy is. Some will appeal to the law of the excluded middle yet fail to realize folks like Bruuwer, a logician, created maths that exclude the concept all together. Weisäcker, yet another logician, uses ternary rather than binary states of propositions; as this is mandatory given that maths and logic must account for the quantum. Some, not very often any more since it’s not low hanging fruit for a layman, refer to the law of sufficient ground or decidability while forgetting Gödel’s proof that no, for any proposition, we cannot say that it is valid conditional to it being able to be proved or disproved. By far the most referenced law is that of identity. If we meant something other than “A is the same thing as A”, we wouldn’t know exactly what we meant. This is a tautology, and as such, only has necessity in a formal system such as math or logic but it in itself cannot tell us anything about the world; that’s contingent to the formal system itself but only coincidentally; as both logician and mathematician admit.

Logic is a formal description of how folks think. Logic does not entail truth. Logic was entirely created by reasoning about reasoning. Of course then it’s going to make sense! Logic is not absolute in any sense but that we have to ourselves hold its axioms and tautological relationships and expressions thus, but not on account of gods or logic being ontologically objective in the world. Like English or any other language, logic simply must be stable; that is all, a fortiori.

Dear apologist, if you don’t know the topic you’re trying to elucidate, then don’t speak to it; that’s unethical and just plain dumb!

Thank you for playing.