"Its investigations are based upon rational thinking, striving to make no unexamined assumptions and no leaps based on faith or pure analogy." |
Philosophy
Philosophy is the discipline concerned with questions of how one should live (ethics); what sorts of things exist and what are their essential natures (metaphysics); what counts as genuine knowledge (epistemology); and what are
the correct principles of reasoning (logic). The word itself is of Greek origin: (philosophía), a compound of (phílos: friend, or lover) and (sophía: wisdom).
Though no single definition of philosophy is uncontroversial, and the field has historically expanded and changed depending upon what kinds of questions were interesting or relevant in a given era, it is generally agreed that
philosophy is a method, rather than a set of claims, propositions, or theories. Its investigations are based upon rational thinking, striving to make no unexamined assumptions and no leaps based on faith or pure analogy.
Different philosophers have had varied ideas about the nature of reason, and there is also disagreement about the subject matter of philosophy. Some think that philosophy examines the process of inquiry itself. Others, that there
are essentially philosophical propositions which it is the task of philosophy to prove.
Logical Logic, Reasons for Reason, and Rationale for Rationality
Logic, Reason, and Rationality
When discussing matters of a philosophical nature, there are certain "Laws of Logic" or "Rules of Reason", so to speak, that must be maintained. If we are to be engaged in any rational discussion, we must adhere
to the ground rules of reason, lest our discussion be guilty of making no sense at all. I would like to briefly mention one such rule of reason before progressing any further.
"Law of Self Contradiction"
This law of reason states that nothing can "
Be" and "
Not Be" at the same time and in the same relationship. It states that nothing can be "
True" and "
False"
at the same time and in the same relationship. To violate the "Law of Self Contradiction" (also known as the "Law of Contradiction") is to flee from rationality and violate reason itself.
Mystery and Paradox
It should be understood that a "
Contradiction" is not the same as a "
Mystery" or a "
Paradox". Neither a
mystery or a
paradox violates any philosophical laws
of reason, nor are they
self-contradictory. A mystery is something that has a valid and rational explanation, but is not yet explainable due to the lack of data or understanding. A paradox is something that seems self-contradictory
or absurd, but in reality expresses a possible truth in a way that can create circular logic.
To Tell The Truth
Truth (Part I) — Relative or Absolute?
It may be argued by some, that "
truth" is only "
relative" and not "
absolute" in accounting for
what is. Those who are persuaded in the "relative" position
regarding truth, would argue that "
there is no absolute truth" In other words, they would argue that truth can be different for one person than for another. It is a philosophical system of belief that nothing
is or can be absolute and that everything is only relative to one's perspective.
If you were to ask someone, who prescribes to the view that there is no absolute truth, if this can be
absolutely true, then they would have to respond by either saying no (contradicting themselves about no absolute truth)
demonstrated that there own argument cannot be a valid one based on their own definition of truth that lacks any absoluteness, or they would have to answer yes (contradicting themselves) by declaring that the nonexistence of absolute
truth is absolute. Either way, it's either a contradiction (reckless reasoning), or a verbal paradox which lends no solution to reasoning.
Truth (Part II) — Absolutely No Absolutes? - A Verbal Paradox
This gets a little tricky, but consider this;
If truth is only relative and not absolute, then the truth of this philosophy is not absolute and therefore subject to suspicion. Therefore, absolute truth
is indeed possible, since relative truth cannot be absolute. But how can there be absolute truth if nothing is absolute? And how can there be relative truth absolutely, if nothing is absolute?
So, if nothing is absolute, then there can be no relative or absolute truth absolutely. But if nothing is absolute, then this cannot be true either because nothing is absolute! As you can see, a philosophy of relative
truth stops us cold at reasoning at all. Nothing creative or constructive regarding intellectual debate can ever be accomplished with a
relative-truth mind set. What would be the point engaging in any debate without absolutes?
Truth (Part III) — Is Relative Truth Absolute? - Another Verbal Paradox
In reality, a philosophy of
relative truth is a philosophy of
self—contradiction. To reason that "
relative truth is
absolute" is a contradiction in terms and therefore an argument
against itself. Something cannot be "
true" and "
not true" at the same time and in the same relationship for reasons explained earlier. If truth is defined as something that "
may",
or "
may not" be, then the word
truth has been stripped of any meaning or relevancy in even using the word to describe anything that
is, or
is not.
True or False? — But not Both!
I have not even mentioned the word "
False" here, and will not belabor the point much further other than to say that if truth is absolute, then falsification is absolute. Something is either
true or
false,
but not both at the same time and in the same relationship. If something is
true, then it cannot be
false; If something is
false, then it cannot be
true. Otherwise, these words have no meaning,
or inverse relationship with one another, and again, debating anything would be a fools game without absolutes. So, accepting that truth and error are absolute, we can continue to reason together with meaning and purpose.
Here's Thinking of You
I Think I Can Think, I Think
Some may find it a little unsettling to have someone else define for them how to properly think. After all, what could be more simple than thinking and why should someone else tell us how to do it? But let me point out that reckless
thought or self-seeking logic can be devastating to anyone honestly seeking truth or eliminating error in their quest to discover "what is and what is not". We are all philosophers capable of some degree of independent
thought, but this does not mean that we are all good philosophers uncovering absolute truth necessary for getting answers to our heart's yearnings or for comfort founded in truth. Sometimes, it is good to get some direction in organized
thinking, lest we become overly biased in our own subjective opinions without considering the bigger picture.
"Free Thinkers" Are Not As Free In Their Thinking As They Think
Some have declared themselves as being "
Free Thinkers" because they have rebuked theological viewpoints regarding the nature and origins of the universe. But I find that none of us can truly be "
Free"
in our thinking, due to the presuppositions and bias that have been installed in us by our circumstances, acquaintances, media exposure, institutional teachings, traditions, and last but not least, pride. We cannot be absolutely
free in our thinking because we are not absolutely
free in our being. I believe what Jesus said when He told us that "
the truth will set you free" but we have to
be willing to accept truth in order to be free or perhaps we must be made free to accept truth! In either case, Jesus said "
I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except
through me". I believe this is where a function of God's grace, by graciously administering truth to our closed and corrupt way of thinking, sets us free from our old habits of reckless reasoning that enables us
to see things as they really are.
We have many limitations and obstacles. Unfortunately, we are more biased than we would like to admit, so being free in our rationale is more about wishful thinking than a reality, unless we have been made free through the power
of God's provision of grace. Some of our presuppositions and bias can be put in check if we can be honest and careful in our thinking, especially if we are willing to admit that perhaps we have been wrong in assuming certain things
that we have believed in the past. Plato and Socrates understood this as well and spent their lives trying to liberate themselves from personal bias using systems of logic and rationality. I believe that Christians have an advantage
here because the power of God's Spirit reveals truth to His subjects in a way that mere human logic can rarely accomplish. God's Spirit has a way of divorcing us from our former way of thinking to a new way of thinking that is more
honest and unbiased.
Re-examine Your Thinking And Why You Believe What You Believe
Logic, by means of abstract or deductive reasoning, will never solve all the mysteries of the universe, but it can be very beneficial, at least, in eliminating some of the common misconceptions about certain ideas that we have maintained
and taken for granted without closer examination. At some point in our lives, I think it prudent to re-examine what we believe about anything and re-discover why we believe it. It is reassuring to know that our coveted conclusions
about truth can be proofed-out rationally, whether its source is Scriptural, truly scientific, etc., instead of based on what someone else smarter than us told us is truth according to their examinations and convictions. Question
and test everything, including what I am writing!!
