Suggestion: Schumann

Logic in Religious Discourse by Andrew Schumann

In this book logicians try to hear Heaven’s Call and analyze religious discourse. As a result, the notion of religious logic as a part of philosophical logic is introduced. Its tasks are to construct consistent logical systems formalizing religious reasoning that at first sight seems inconsistent, to carry out an illocutionary analysis of religious discourse, and to formalize ancient and medieval logical theories used in the theology of an appropriate religion.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

David Paul

Ugh! Better you than me.

While this is ramping up for production, how about some dental surgery without the Novocaine? You know, something to put me in the mood...

[:S]

George Somsel

Logic in Religious Discourse by Andrew Schumann

In this book logicians try to hear Heaven’s Call and analyze religious discourse. As a result, the notion of religious logic as a part of philosophical logic is introduced. Its tasks are to construct consistent logical systems formalizing religious reasoning that at first sight seems inconsistent, to carry out an illocutionary analysis of religious discourse, and to formalize ancient and medieval logical theories used in the theology of an appropriate religion.

Logic is different for non-religious discourse from religious discourse? I think not. If something seems illogical but isn't, it is most likely due to equivocation on terms.

David Paul

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/578260#Comment_578260

I think, building on the concept that Plantinga developed, the idea is that one who is a "believer" doesn't have to start from a position of asking IF God exists and then is forced to prove that statement. The idea is that God's existence is a given axiom that is perceived to be a logical and inevitable result of creation...or something to that effect.

I'm fine with talking about this stuff, but the way these sorts go about doing it is about as pleasant as a hydrochloric acid bath.

MJ. Smith

Another description:

Knocking on Heaven's Door is the oldest human dream that seems unrealized still. Religious discourse does show the road, but it requires a blind faith in return. In this book logicians try to hear Heaven's Call and to analyze religious discourse. As a result, the notion of religious logic as a part of philosophical logic is introduced. Its tasks are (1) to construct consistent logical systems formalizing religious reasoning that at first sight seems inconsistent (this research is fulfilled within the limits of modal logic, paraconsistent logic and many-valued logic), (2) to carry out an illocutionary analysis of religious discourse (this research is fulfilled in frames of illocutionary logics), and (3) to formalize Ancient and Medieval logical theories used in the theology of an appropriate religion (they could be studied within the limits of unconventional logics, such as non-monotonic logics, non-well-founded logics, etc.).

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/578258#Comment_578258

While this is ramping up for production, how about some dental surgery without the Novocaine? You know, something to put me in the mood...

Not my problem that you don't find thinking clearly fun[:P]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/578260#Comment_578260

Logic is different for non-religious discourse from religious discourse? I think not.

True but Talmudic logic is not Aristotlian logic is not Dharmakirti's logic. And when you get into informal logics ... well, I added a more extensive description above for those who jump to conclusions as to content.[;)]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/578262#Comment_578262

I think, building on the concept that Plantinga developed, the idea is that one who is a "believer" doesn't have to start from a position of asking IF God exists and then is forced to prove that statement. The idea is that God's existence is a given axiom that is perceived to be a logical and inevitable result of creation...or something to that effect.

Actually the idea is much simpler - to be able to read ancient and Medieval texts within an appropriate intellectual context.

Unix

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/578272#Comment_578272

I'm sure it would be a great book for me to have, and I'm equally sure I would not afford it unless the pre-pub price would be at least 40% off.