I don't like how religion is considered separate from logic

  • Thread starter Thread starter SpeakKindly
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SpeakKindly

Guest
I’ve heard of questions like:

“Are there any logical reasons to be against abortion? Most reasons are just emotional or religious.”

This implies not only that religious views, like emotions are not unstable grounds to base an argument on, but also not logical. Religious views are indeed logical though, they should make sense, even if we cannot grasp some of the complexities (like the Trinity).

I think when people think about religious reasons for anything they think of the easy discussions that are torn apart (the Earth being 6,000 years old, for example), or are hard to argue a starting point for (immortal souls being a starting point for a discussion about abortion, for example).
 
SpeakKindly said:
I’ve heard of questions like:

“Are there any logical reasons to be against abortion? Most reasons are just emotional or religious.”

This implies not only that religious views, like emotions are not unstable grounds to base an argument on, but also not logical. Religious views are indeed logical though, they should make sense, even if we cannot grasp some of the complexities (like the Trinity).

I think when people think about religious reasons for anything they think of the easy discussions that are torn apart (the Earth being 6,000 years old, for example), or are hard to argue a starting point for (immortal souls being a starting point for a discussion about abortion, for example).
Click to expand...
That is one thing I love about the Catholic Church. We use both faith and reason.
 
SteveVH said:
That is one thing I love about the Catholic Church. We use both faith and reason.
Click to expand...
This reminds of me having a friendly debate with someone recently about world standards in morality there were things we didn’t agree with and she responded “you think theologically, I think logically” 🤷

MJ
 
I think as a society we’re affected more by the anti-religious 19th century thinkers such as Marx more than we realize, and the rejection of science by some religious people doesn’t help. Reason put to the service of faith produced the Summa Theologica, and it’s time that got pointed out. Unbelief doesn’t have a monopoly on reasoned argument.
 
.

What is the difference between the logic of religion and the logic of mythology?

.
 
SpeakKindly said:
I’ve heard of questions like:

“Are there any logical reasons to be against abortion? Most reasons are just emotional or religious.”

This implies not only that religious views, like emotions are not unstable grounds to base an argument on, but also not logical. Religious views are indeed logical though, they should make sense, even if we cannot grasp some of the complexities (like the Trinity).

I think when people think about religious reasons for anything they think of the easy discussions that are torn apart (the Earth being 6,000 years old, for example), or are hard to argue a starting point for (immortal souls being a starting point for a discussion about abortion, for example).
Click to expand...
I’m sorry, but I have found the irreligious to use emotional argument to a much greater extent than the religious. I have seen many debates where the religious position argues a logical case, and the irreligious win the debate through emotion without actually presenting a case.🤷

I think there is a difference between emotion and compassion.
 
Darryl_B said:
I have seen many debates where the religious position argues a logical case, and the irreligious win the debate through emotion without actually presenting a case.🤷
Click to expand...
How ironic that some atheists and irreligious people say they’re “rational” because they don’t follow God or religion; yet have arguments that are irrational. It’s just a very stuck-up attitude.

And yes, one of the reasons I love the Catholic Church is the use of both faith and reason. I can even go so far to say that Roman Catholicism is the most rational of all Christian denominations.
 
SpeakKindly said:
I’ve heard of questions like:

“Are there any logical reasons to be against abortion? Most reasons are just emotional or religious.”

This implies not only that religious views, like emotions are not unstable grounds to base an argument on, but also not logical. Religious views are indeed logical though, they should make sense, even if we cannot grasp some of the complexities (like the Trinity).

I think when people think about religious reasons for anything they think of the easy discussions that are torn apart (the Earth being 6,000 years old, for example), or are hard to argue a starting point for (immortal souls being a starting point for a discussion about abortion, for example).
Click to expand...
I would counter with the question “Are there any logical reasons to be in favor of abortion? All reasons that I have ever heard are just emotional and illogical.” Then I would point them to the book Pro-Life Answers to Pro-Choice Arguments. 🙂
 
Servant19 said:
.

What is the difference between the logic of religion and the logic of mythology?

.
Click to expand...
A good answer to this question depends on a refinement of the question. What religion specifically, are you asking about?
 
I know how you feel. One area that seems to be problematic in my life is related to health issues. I used to have terrible, chronic migraines. They started when I was 9 years old, and I had headaches about 50% of the time. So many doctors would dismiss this as an emotional disorder. But when I became Catholic in my 20’s I actually had doctors respond with an “Oooh!”–when they found out I was Catholic. It was as if my religion was the reason for my illness.

Come to find out, most recently, they probably had to do with my heart. I have never understood how people can automatically view a person as a hypochondriac when they are ill, and they find out you are a Christian. It drives me just nuts. It is as if you need to become an Atheist to be cured. Stupid.

Those who don’t believe will never understand and they can’t deal with logic despite their efforts to use it as an argument against religion or faith. Those that do believe can usually deal with both logic and faith. Remember, the spirit discerns all things, science and logic do not.
 
TheSurvivor said:
A good answer to this question depends on a refinement of the question. What religion specifically, are you asking about?
Click to expand...
Any religion really. How does one discern between rational, logical faith, and blind faith?

.
 
As Judeo Christian deists, we believe that all people are made in the image of God through free will and intellect.

Any person can perceive the existence of God in nature and the use of reason.

God created the world through weights and measures, which we define as the Natural Law. And even God follows His own laws. Because He is in essence, – love with order.
 
I think it’s a false dichotomy.

People live by both faith and logic. No matter if they have a religion, personal philosophy, or never much think about it and fly by the seat of their pants. I don’t think there is a way to address life that doesn’t include both logic, faith, hope, and willful and unwillful ignorance.

It’s the human condition.

Different religions, philosophies and personalities have varying balances of faith and logic, but at some point everyone, if they are honest and astute must recognize that they use both those things in their approach to life. To use one exclusively…well, you wouldn’t last long.

I think that beyond a certain point it ceases to be useful for a religion to argue their validity on logic alone, because it will fall short. Likewise, I think it’s pointless for anyone to argue they act on pure logic and therefore will never be religious.

Also, what makes “sense” or “logic” to a person is, and always will be, influenced by their personality and experience.

I don’t think that religions should be expected to prove themselves 100% logical, there is nothing wrong or shameful to have places and situation where one acts on faith, or where one practices a faith to strengthen their spirituality.

Whether one believes that spirituality is involved with the mystical or is just another brain function, it appears that the majority of humans have a spiritual aspect and benefit from making it active in their lives. That part is pretty darn logical.
 
Servant19 said:
.

What is the difference between the logic of religion and the logic of mythology?

.
Click to expand...
Mythology believes in the “gods”, meaning they believed they were part of our materialistic natural world, as if they were something you could observe. When Christians/Jews say “God” we are referring to the one God that is you can’t “discover” via scientific method. God, quoting from St. Thomas Aquinas, not the highest being, or being among beings, but to be itself, is God
 
SpeakKindly said:
This implies not only that religious views, like emotions are not unstable grounds to base an argument on, but also not logical. Religious views are indeed logical though, they should make sense, even if we cannot grasp some of the complexities (like the Trinity).

I think when people think about religious reasons for anything they think of the easy discussions that are torn apart …
Click to expand...
All religions have their own rules and those who follow them think they are completely logical. That’s not always the case. Yet all religions claim that they are right and others are wrong. You think the teachings of the Church are logical and correct because you have faith. So does the next person who happens not to be Catholic. People think about religious teachings that can be picked apart because they can be picked apart. It’s a matter of faith. If it was easy to explain, or logical, one wouldn’t need faith.

There are many rules and laws of religion (any religion) that wouldn’t be followed if it weren’t for the fact that it was a rule of that religion (and punishable in that religion, and in some cases punishable by death). You as a Catholic see the rules of the Church as final. Other people of other religions feel the same way about the rules of their religion. And those who do not follow the rules of a religion feel that they don’t have to follow those rules because they are free not to - because those rules are based on religious teachings.

Religion is considered separate from logic because religion is a matter of faith and doesn’t always follow logic. You can argue that the rules of the Church are of course logical, and can question the comprehension and intelligence of another person who does not agree. However, the same argument can be made of a Jew or Muslim, or Baptist, or Anglican, etc. They also think the rules of their religion are completely logical and make complete sense, and they question the intelligence, even prudence, of those who don’t agree.

I can think of a few rules of the Church that aren’t logical. They’re just rules. There is no logic to them. And a Catholic chooses to obey those rules, logical or not, or not obey them. If a Catholic wants to be compliant with the Church, they follow those rules, and if they don’t want to be in communion with the Church, they fail to obey them. But I think it’s unreasonable to expect others who don’t have faith to see the ‘logic’ in some of the teachings of a particular religion. You’ll have to bring them to that religion first and they need to find faith first.

As to abortion and religion, the only thing I will point out is: different religions have different rules regarding abortion, with the Catholic Church being the most strict and unmoving. OTOH, in the Jewish religion and muslim religion, abortion is allowed in the case where the woman’s life is in danger. You can say the rules of the Church are logical and any other teaching is illogical, however, the Muslim or Jew can say the same. They all believe their teachings are the most logical and the most correct. Yet, each will say the other is being illogical. When arguing with someone about abortion, it is better to argue concrete tangible matters than to argue with religious teachings that are based on faith, because if the other person who is speaking with you has no faith, they’re not going to see the “logic” that is so obvious to you.
 
Rence said:
All religions have their own rules and those who follow them think they are completely logical. That’s not always the case. Yet all religions claim that they are right and others are wrong. You think the teachings of the Church are logical and correct because you have faith. So does the next person who happens not to be Catholic. People think about religious teachings that can be picked apart because they can be picked apart. It’s a matter of faith. If it was easy to explain, or logical, one wouldn’t need faith.

There are many rules and laws of religion (any religion) that wouldn’t be followed if it weren’t for the fact that it was a rule of that religion (and punishable in that religion, and in some cases punishable by death). You as a Catholic see the rules of the Church as final. Other people of other religions feel the same way about the rules of their religion. And those who do not follow the rules of a religion feel that they don’t have to follow those rules because they are free not to - because those rules are based on religious teachings.

Religion is considered separate from logic because religion is a matter of faith and doesn’t always follow logic. You can argue that the rules of the Church are of course logical, and can question the comprehension and intelligence of another person who does not agree. However, the same argument can be made of a Jew or Muslim, or Baptist, or Anglican, etc. They also think the rules of their religion are completely logical and make complete sense, and they question the intelligence, even prudence, of those who don’t agree.

I can think of a few rules of the Church that aren’t logical. They’re just rules. There is no logic to them. And a Catholic chooses to obey those rules, logical or not, or not obey them. If a Catholic wants to be compliant with the Church, they follow those rules, and if they don’t want to be in communion with the Church, they fail to obey them. But I think it’s unreasonable to expect others who don’t have faith to see the ‘logic’ in some of the teachings of a particular religion. You’ll have to bring them to that religion first and they need to find faith first.

As to abortion and religion, the only thing I will point out is: different religions have different rules regarding abortion, with the Catholic Church being the most strict and unmoving. OTOH, in the Jewish religion and muslim religion, abortion is allowed in the case where the woman’s life is in danger. You can say the rules of the Church are logical and any other teaching is illogical, however, the Muslim or Jew can say the same. They all believe their teachings are the most logical and the most correct. Yet, each will say the other is being illogical. When arguing with someone about abortion, it is better to argue concrete tangible matters than to argue with religious teachings that are based on faith, because if the other person who is speaking with you has no faith, they’re not going to see the “logic” that is so obvious to you.
Click to expand...
Very well put. Before anyone believes their faith beliefs are the correct ones and the truth, they must have faith. I only wish more Catholics would grasp that.
 
Abortion is one of the few Catholic social issues that can effectively be argued against using purely secular terms. If you’re debating someone who’s outside of Christianity, there’s really no point in bringing up faith-based arguments.

And in regards to the topic title: concepts such as a virgin giving birth to an Absolute God who lives his life as a carpenter, or that same God existing spiritually within the bread and wine of the Eucharist… Surely you can understand how such beliefs would come across as outlandish myth to the uninitiated?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top