Q&A: Is God Subject to Logic?
Is God Subject to Logic?
Question
I showed a friend your article about the claim that God is subject to logic, and this is what he answered me. What do you think?
Well, from what I understood, he’s not exactly saying that God is subject to the laws of logic; he’s kind of dancing around it.
In any case, I do think he has a few main mistakes that are worth asking him about.
First of all, everything he says and proves works out very well, but according to our logic—that is, he is simply inferring from the laws of logic themselves that they are valid in every situation, whereas it’s possible that they are not valid. Obviously, if that were the case, we would not be able to determine any truth about them from our logical point of departure. Another thing: it was already proven long ago that the very world we live in does not exactly “obey” our laws of logic. For example, our ability to move was already logically proven impossible by Parmenides.
Another example is a triangle: by definition it can contain only 180 degrees, but in space there are logical situations in which it contains 270 degrees. That is, there may even be a situation in which (before the singularity point, perhaps?) a triangle would be round.
In summary, I don’t think one can infer any logical truth about a system of logic or non-logic that lies outside our system, and moreover, the logical system itself contains contradictions that do not match our reality.
In conclusion, under the hypothetical assumption that there is a state with a different logic, or with no logic at all, as Soviets who are limited to logic, we could never prove or refute it.
Answer
I already answered all this, and I don’t see anything new here.
I did not prove my points on the basis of logic. My points are a reflection on logic and its meaning. My claim is that talk outside logic is meaningless. If you want to claim that God is not subject to logic, then you can also say that He is both merciful and cruel at the same time. Both exists and does not exist. Both created the world and did not create it. In short, you are not saying anything at all. A person can mutter nonsense syllables for his own enjoyment. But you can’t call that speech or a claim. I asked whether God can create a stone that He cannot lift, or can create a shell that penetrates every wall and a wall that is resistant to every shell at the same time. Please give me an answer to that, and then we can talk (or maybe we won’t be able to). As long as one does not do that, this is just tossing around empty words with no content.
The example of the triangle is simply a mistake. In Euclidean space there is no other angle sum. In non-Euclidean space this is possible, but there too there is a different fixed sum and no other. In every reality (space or metric) there is some particular angle sum and no other.
Discussion on Answer
If you had read the places I referred you to, you would have seen that “subject” here is exactly what you wrote regarding a round triangle, and not subject in the sense used with respect to the laws of the state or the laws of physics.
Honestly, you’ve pretty much started to convince me, but when you say “God is subject to logic,” it sounds like God has reason prior to His creating the world. Before He created the world, even then He could not create a round triangle? I assume not—but not because it isn’t logical, rather because those things did not exist.
If so, how can it be that God is subject to logic?