Q&A: A Problem with Grounding the Existence of God through Logic
A Problem with Grounding the Existence of God through Logic
Question
Hello, honorable Rabbi.
As someone who loves philosophy, I’ve often wondered: is it really correct to ground the existence of such a significant entity through logic alone?
After all, philosophy is based on arguments, and in almost every philosophical discussion there are always arguments in favor and always arguments against. For every argument that is made, other philosophers arise and argue against it.
It could be that right now there is an argument strong enough for the existence of God (or for His non-existence), but before someone made that argument there was an argument strong enough for His non-existence (or His existence). Doesn’t that make God sometimes existent and sometimes not? After all, if there is currently an argument strong enough for the existence of God (or for His non-existence), that only means that no mind sharp enough has yet arisen to find an argument that refutes the argument for it (or against it).
I’d be glad to hear what you think about this, and about the question whether it is correct to ground the existence of such a significant entity through logic alone.
Thank you very much.
Answer
The term “logic” hides behind it a whole world. Everything in the world is based on arguments and logic. Do you have some other instrument? Every decision in the world is based on arguments. When you believe what you see or your life experience, that too is logic in the sense you’re talking about. So I don’t understand the question.
Discussion on Answer
You assume that belief must be certain. But there is nothing in the world that is certain, and still we make decisions under conditions of uncertainty, even difficult decisions.
You can read my notebooks here on the site, especially Notebook 0 (the introduction).
Rabbi, but are first principles really based on arguments and logic?!
Sometimes yes, and sometimes on intuition.
It’s true that everything in the world is based on arguments and logic, or at least claims to be.
I mean logic in the sense of being built on valid arguments—arguments made up of premises that ultimately lead to a conclusion that necessarily follows from the premises (a sound argument).
I’ll try to formulate it in the structure of an argument:
Premise A: Every decision or belief in the world is based on arguments and logic (including belief in the existence of God).
Premise B: Arguments are not absolute.
Conclusion: Belief in the existence of God is not absolute, unless you hold a supporting argument for it (which can also change).
Can belief in the existence of God arise purely from a decision of common sense?
And if so, can this argument perhaps be seen as one that undermines the existence of God?
Sorry if you detect ignorance or lack of knowledge here (I’m not a philosopher, just an enthusiast).
And if you do, I’d be glad if you could point me to articles or books that could help bridge the gap.
Thank you, and have a good week.