Allah is a logical entity.
-
I?ve heard a lot of people say that Allah is not ?logical? or ?reasonable? for a while (not necessarily on this site but I?m sure this site is not free of such sentiments) and I?m not sure what it is people try to achieve by making such a claim.
No it isn't free of such sentiments. Some people think this is because God 'transcends' logic/reason and He doesn't need it to communicate with us, hell for some people the quran even 'transcends' the language and grammar it came down in magically and a new language is created by said persons...I still can't figure out what they achieve except maybe some bogus self satisfaction that they are the 'evolved' ones and have 'outgrown' reason, or in some cases that God can do the impossible...though I'm sure you know of this one already...
Note this does not mean that us humans well ever fully understand Allah or be able to decipher Allah?s intentions, all it means is Allah is logical. There is a very important distinction in ?knowing? something and realising that it is logical, in fact, the two shouldn?t even be compared. However this note is for the inevitable few that will (compare).
I agree, very interesting post overall, must think some more on this wink
-
Salaam,
Is there such a thing as objective reasoning ? (hint look at 18/60-82)
That's irrelevant. Fact is the Qur'an is open to logical investigation which implies that the author of the Qur'an is a logical entity.
Also, reasoning and logic was equated in the first post, and logic is objective. I didn't think I needed to state that as it is fairly obvious. /
For 1860-82 - that objectifies reason more than subjectifies it. On one hand you had poor reasoning based on a lack of information, and on the other you had greater reasoning based on truthful information. This implies that regardless of what we think, there is an objective truth to every situation.
-
That's irrelevant. Fact is the Qur'an is open to logical investigation which implies that the author of the Qur'an is a logical entity.
I'm afraid its very relevant. 'Logic' implies that with the right premises, the right deduction will be inevitable. Its only logical, as Spockie used to say.
Also, reasoning and logic was equated in the first post, and logic is objective. I didn't think I needed to state that as it is fairly obvious. /
How can reasoning be objective if you don't know if you have all the right hypothesis?
For 1860-82 - that objectifies reason more than subjectifies it. On one hand you had poor reasoning based on a lack of information, and on the other you had greater reasoning based on truthful information. This implies that regardless of what we think, there is an objective truth to every situation.
The point is, Musa the Prophet failed to deduce correctly for the reason that he lacked vital information. Therefore, in order to deduce God exists, you need all right premises. Can you point out the right premises, please?
-
I'm afraid its very relevant. 'Logic' implies that with the right premises, the right deduction will be inevitable. Its only logical, as Spockie used to say.
Attacking the premise of an argument is pointless. The premise is there to ensure that the argument only speaks to a certain group of people thus attacking it yeilds no result. I never made the argument to apply to Atheists and Hindus and Christians and Jews equally - I directed it towards people who are Muslim and believe that the Qur'an's author is Allah. The argument seeks to build on the premise provided to form a logically sound argument for why Allah has to be a logical entity. If you don't believe in the premise to begin with then you have no business here.
How can reasoning be objective if you don't know if you have all the right hypothesis?
Reasonning is rationalising and rationalisation = logical thinking. If logic is objective then it follows that there is a level of reasoning which is also objective. We may not know how to reason objectively about everything (due to our lack of data) but that does not mean we can't reason objectively about some things (re Descartes, Spinoza); therefore by inference with enough information one can reason objectively. I'd also like to note that in my argument the words logic/rational/reason can be used interchangeably.
So, how do you know when you have enough information? Easy; take a statement and see if its contradiction results in absurdity (that is, a logical fallacy). If so, congratulations because you've just found yourself an objective statement. An example of such a statement is "something cannot come from nothing". Its contradiction is "something can come from nothing" and that is an absurdity.
Logic is not subjective and it is not a democracy. 2+2 does not become 5 because you want it to. A statement and its contradiction aren't the same because you think it's a rad idea. People tend to forget this too easily.
The point is, Musa the Prophet failed to deduce correctly for the reason that he lacked vital information. Therefore, in order to deduce God exists, you need all right premises. Can you point out the right premises, please?
This thread is not about proving god's existence. Premise 1 the Qur?an is the irrefutable word of Allah (if you have problems with this please stop reading now).
If you want to dabble on the existence of god make a thread and do it there.
I've said this before but I'll say it again this article does not seek to prove the existence of god/Allah; what it does attempt to show however is if you believe the Qur'an is the irrefutable word of Allah then it necessary follows that Allah is a logical entity.
-
Just because the Qur'an is the word of the God doesn't mean that it gives us the information we need to understand fully the Universe, Allah, or how Allah operates in the Universe. In my opinion, the parable that mquran pointed out does a good job of showing us how our perspectives-which are an indelible foundation for our logisitical reasoning skills-will not always lead us to the Truth. Unless you receive some sort of knowledge by Allah's leave, the Qur'an alone is still not sufficient enough to explain "the plan" from an objectively divine perspective. Even in the parable, the Servant only had more knowledge of the Reality by Allah's will. I mean, we really don't need to know the plan from an objectively divine perspective as our eternity is determined by our actions. The qur'an spells out our instructions clearly.
Sure, we can rationalize those things that we have knowledge of...our choices and behavior, for example. But to assume that Allah operates on a "logical" plane as we know it is it bit presumptious, in my opinion. Why does mankind always try to give the God human characteristics? I'll reread your post to see if I can better understand your perspective.
Peace.
-
SaLaM Salikah
Exactly. Quran is not a history book or a science book. If you want to learn about history, you pick up the history books. If you want to learn about science, you pick up a quantum physics book. ITs amazing how people deny history simply becoz it is not in the Quran. for example, people were comming to kabbah before the time of the Prophet Muhammad. But try to tell that to someone who thinks if its not in the Quran, then its not true. Amazing
roll
-
Salaamun alaikum Neo,
Attacking the premise of an argument is pointless. The premise is there to ensure that the argument only speaks to a certain group of people thus attacking it yeilds no result. I never made the argument to apply to Atheists and Hindus and Christians and Jews equally - I directed it towards people who are Muslim and believe that the Qur'an's author is Allah. The argument seeks to build on the premise provided to form a logically sound argument for why Allah has to be a logical entity. If you don't believe in the premise to begin with then you have no business here.
Ok, so rephrase you If one believes in al-quraan, one must therefore believe that Allah is a logical entity.
Would you mind showing me the steps towards this deduction please?
Reasonning is rationalising and rationalisation = logical thinking. If logic is objective then it follows that there is a level of reasoning which is also objective. We may not know how to reason objectively about everything (due to our lack of data) but that does not mean we can't reason objectively about some things (re Descartes, Spinoza); therefore by inference with enough information one can reason objectively. I'd also like to note that in my argument the words logic/rational/reason can be used interchangeably.
Glad to see you addressed my point, thank you. I disagree because there's no way of knowing if one has the correct set of information. See below, please.
So, how do you know when you have enough information? Easy; take a statement and see if its contradiction results in absurdity (that is, a logical fallacy). If so, congratulations because you've just found yourself an objective statement. An example of such a statement is "something cannot come from nothing". Its contradiction is "something can come from nothing" and that is an absurdity
Hmm, I'm sorry but can you help me out here, I am unschooled in formal logic and philosophy
Why is it an absurdity again?
As far as I can see , you just constructed two statements which oppose one another. I might well ask 'why can't something come from nothing' ? The truth of the initial statement depends on empirical observation, doesn't it?
Logic is not subjective and it is not a democracy. 2+2 does not become 5 because you want it to. A statement and its contradiction aren't the same because you think it's a rad idea. People tend to forget this too easily
.Im afraid the analogy of 2+2=5 doesn't work because '2', '5' '=' and '+' are linguistic definitions. The proof that Allah exists logically depends on a
whole lot more.I've said this before but I'll say it again this article does not seek to prove the existence of god/Allah; what it does attempt to show however is if you believe the Qur'an is the irrefutable word of Allah then it necessary follows that Allah is a logical entity.
Yes, that I agree. So we cannot prove the existence of Allah throught al-quraan. I believe in Allah first and through my analysis of al-quraan, I believe it was taught by Allah. It's not the other way round, Im afraid.
-
Just because the Qur'an is the word of the God doesn't mean that it gives us the information we need to understand fully the Universe, Allah, or how Allah operates in the Universe. In my opinion, the parable that mquran pointed out does a good job of showing us how our perspectives-which are an indelible foundation for our logisitical reasoning skills-will not always lead us to the Truth. Unless you receive some sort of knowledge by Allah's leave, the Qur'an alone is still not sufficient enough to explain "the plan" from an objectively divine perspective. Even in the parable, the Servant only had more knowledge of the Reality by Allah's will. I mean, we really don't need to know the plan from an objectively divine perspective as our eternity is determined by our actions. The qur'an spells out our instructions clearly.
Sure, we can rationalize those things that we have knowledge of...our choices and behavior, for example. But to assume that Allah operates on a "logical" plane as we know it is it bit presumptious, in my opinion. Why does mankind always try to give the God human characteristics? I'll reread your post to see if I can better understand your perspective.
Peace.
I'm not saying the Qur'an provides all the answers. I'm saying the Qur'an is reasonable/logical/rational because it is permeable to rational thought, thus by extension so is Allah - the author of the Qur'an. In fact, no where do I mention anything about the Qur'an providing us with everything needed to understand reality.
Calling god a logical entity hardly reduces it or gives it a human characteristic. I fail to see why a logical god is a humanistic god. A piece of rock is perfectly logical, is that humanistic too? Being logical means being concise and self consistent, no more and no less. I don't know why everyone thinks logic is the ultimate demoter.
And honestly, saying that god is beyond logic is just an easy way to get around tricky theological issues and is ultimately useless (which I also outlined in my openning paragraph) because it leads to a very superficial understanding of the religion/god itself.
-
Salaamun alaikum Salikah,
Just because the Qur'an is the word of the God doesn't mean that it gives us the information we need to understand fully the Universe, Allah, or how Allah operates in the Universe. In my opinion, the parable that mquran pointed out does a good job of showing us how our perspectives-which are an indelible foundation for our logisitical reasoning skills-will not always lead us to the Truth. Unless you receive some sort of knowledge by Allah's leave, the Qur'an alone is still not sufficient enough to explain "the plan" from an objectively divine perspective. Even in the parable, the Servant only had more knowledge of the Reality by Allah's will. I mean, we really don't need to know the plan from an objectively divine perspective as our eternity is determined by our actions. The qur'an spells out our instructions clearly.
Al-quraan tells us what we need to know to live in the world successfully, 'success' being defined in al-quraan itself (the word 'al-falah'). It maps the reality of our existence and shows us how to identify where we are and how to get to where we want to be.
No, it's definitely not a book of science but it does tell us how to approach the khalq(evolvement, not a word I know but it captures the essence of the meanng) of Allah. That's what matters. Humankind will always have new information (even information or 'ilm' is properly defined) but thier essence will never change. It is this essence which makes up the contents of Al-Quraan.
I would like to see Al-Quraan be transposed into the realm of philosophy. Then we'll see what it means to 'produce a sura like it'!
-
Ok, so rephrase you If one believes in al-quraan, one must therefore believe that Allah is a logical entity.
Would you mind showing me the steps towards this deduction please?
This is what my first post does.
Hmm, I'm sorry but can you help me out here, I am unschooled in formal logic and philosophy
Why is it an absurdity again?
An absurdity is a logical fallacy/inconsistency/contradiction.
As far as I can see , you just constructed two statements which oppose one another. I might well ask 'why can't something come from nothing' ? The truth of the initial statement depends on empirical observation, doesn't it?
And yes, I made two statements that are the polar opposite of each other which form a logical disjunction (meaning only one can be true, not both); so when you disprove one, the other becomes true by default.
Something cannot come from nothing because 'nothing' has no attributes at all, including the attribute 'to exude something'; therefore it's logical fallacy to claim that 'something' can come from 'nothing'. Hence 'something cannot come from nothing' is an objective statement.
Im afraid the analogy of 2+2=5 doesn't work because '2', '5' '=' and '+' are linguistic definitions. The proof that Allah exists logically depends on a
whole lot more.-
I'm not here to prove Allah
-
These are definitions that pertain to reality. Just because they are symbolic does not mean they contain less truth
-
They may be 'simple' statements but the underline an obvious reality and that is logic is universal; I could have given you a very complex calculus function but there would be no point because 2+2 is enough
Yes, that I agree. So we cannot prove the existence of Allah throught al-quraan. I believe in Allah first and through my analysis of al-quraan, I believe it was taught by Allah. It's not the other way round, Im afraid.
It doesn't have to be around in any which way. If the Qur'an is permeable to reasonned thinking then so must be its author; irrespective of how different people come to find their faith.
-
-
Ok Neo, I take your point. However, to come to believe in al-quraan, we don't depend on al-quraan by itself. Please see 41/53. We come to believe in al-haqq through observation of outer and inner signs. Allah Himself is al-haqq.
peace.
Exactly - the Qur'an is externally verifiable (as in it can be tested against reality and demonstrated to be reasonable).
-
A tree
http//www.bakerlite.co.uk/pics/Wales/South%20Wales/tree.jpgA simple equation
http//www.ealnet.com/ealsoft/tree1.gifA vegetable from the Cauliflower family
http//mkeadle.org/uploads/0101_028.jpgA simple equation
http//www.cs.wisc.edu/~ergreen/honors_thesis/gifs/sierpinski.gifA snowflake
http//www.math.ntnu.no/~hjelle/skole/fraktal/koch_sierpinski.pngAnd all though our attempts at understanding this great work is comparing a fart to a 100 man brassband. There is no doubt that God is logical.
8818 Will they not look at the camels, how are they created?
8819 And to the sky, how is it raised?
8820 And to the mountains, how was it set?
8821 And to the land, how was it flattened? -
Peace be upon you Mel Funktion,
Enjoying your posts, welcome.
-
Peace be upon you Mel Funktion,
Enjoying your posts, welcome.
Peace be upon you too Idolfree, and thank you.
-
A tree
http//www.bakerlite.co.uk/pics/Wales/South%20Wales/tree.jpgA simple equation
http//www.ealnet.com/ealsoft/tree1.gifA vegetable from the Cauliflower family
http//mkeadle.org/uploads/0101_028.jpgA simple equation
http//www.cs.wisc.edu/~ergreen/honors_thesis/gifs/sierpinski.gifA snowflake
http//www.math.ntnu.no/~hjelle/skole/fraktal/koch_sierpinski.pngAnd all though our attempts at understanding this great work is comparing a fart to a 100 man brassband. There is no doubt that God is logical.
8818 Will they not look at the camels, how are they created?
8819 And to the sky, how is it raised?
8820 And to the mountains, how was it set?
8821 And to the land, how was it flattened?Yes...fractals and chaos theory...point being?
-
Yes...fractals and chaos theory...point being?
pretty obvious actually
-
Yes...fractals and chaos theory...point being?
pretty obvious actually
roll
Yes, a picture of a tree is so very pertinent. If you're trying to show that logic can be derived from complex systems which seem chaotic - well done, I totally didn't know that. If you're trying to show that the chaotic world features an undercurrent of logic that can only imply a creator - congratulations 'cause it's a very unique insight which no one prior to you has thought up before. And your last line about god being 'complex but logical' is quite redundent, especially because I mentioned it twice in my post. So really, what's your point?
Seriously, if you've got something to say just say it - but don't post these little "nuggets of wisdom"; they're quite annoying and serve to prove nothing except that you can use google image.
-
Yes...fractals and chaos theory...point being?
pretty obvious actually
roll
Yes, a picture of a tree is so very pertinent. If you're trying to show that logic can be derived from complex systems which seem chaotic - well done, I totally didn't know that. If you're trying to show that the chaotic world features an undercurrent of logic that can only imply a creator - congratulations 'cause it's a very unique insight which no one prior to you has thought up before. And your last line about god being 'complex but logical' is quite redundent, especially because I mentioned it twice in my post. So really, what's your point?
Seriously, if you've got something to say just say it - but don't post these little "nuggets of wisdom"; they're quite annoying and serve to prove nothing except that you can use google image.
Who died and made you God ? Idolfree liked this little "nugget of wisdom" . If you dont get it, or understand it's implications, that would be YOU'R problem! I will use my God given right to express myself freely, Capich