# TAG Argument vs. Materialist



## Saiph (Oct 28, 2005)

What is the materialist replies that the laws of logic are part of the fabric of matter.

I would ask them to show me the laws of logic under a microscope. Laws are not material. 

But, what moves the infinitesimal parts of the atom ?
Why could there not be an intrinsic order to all things on the micro level that apllies to everything from there up ?

How would I respond ?


----------



## Vytautas (Oct 28, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Saiph_
> But, what moves the infinitesimal parts of the atom ?



To answer that question, tell him it is Christ that upholds all things. Col:1:17: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. Here Jesus holds together all things which is what consists means. An atom is a thing. Therefore, atoms move in certain ways because they are controlled by Him.


----------



## Saiph (Oct 28, 2005)

If the laws of logic are universal and immaterial, what does a materialist say regarding that ?


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Oct 28, 2005)

I don't think a materialist is capable of believing in universal laws, such as logic.


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Oct 29, 2005)

For the materialist, either the laws of logic are merely a convention, or they try to base them on the properties of nature (i.e. an apple cannot be and not be an apple in the same way and same relationship.... yadda yadda yadda). And if they go the route of logic reflecting nature, then they still have to justify what to logically think about or account for thought at all. Thought requires values and choices, hence morality. But then where did that come from? Oh yeah the survival of teh fittest, we're all in the fight to survive and thrive. but why? Why is survival a value? Why is life a value? Atoms don't account for that. And on and on it goes. Either way the materialist is in a logical black hole from which nothing meaningful or rational can ever emerge if he attempts to remain consistent.


----------



## Saiph (Oct 29, 2005)

Gabriel and Patrick,

So basically, since they cannot prove that the laws of logic are material, and cannot show me what they look like under an electron microscope, therefore the laws of logic must be metaphysical, and the materialist is inconsistent in his worldview ?



[Edited on 10-29-2005 by Saiph]


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Oct 29, 2005)

> _Originally posted by Saiph_
> Gabriel and Patrick,
> 
> So basically, since they cannot prove that the laws of logic are material, and cannot show me what they look like under an electron microscope, therefore the laws of logic must be metaphysical, and the materialist is inconsistent in his worldview ?



You nailed it. Welcome to presuppositionalism  

Though perhaps it may be better to call them "immaterial" rather than metaphysical. It's not that they are supernatural, rather they are abstract universal principles which reflect God's way of thinking.

[Edited on 10-29-2005 by puritansailor]


----------



## Saiph (Oct 29, 2005)

While you and I know metaphysical primaraly refers to "being", ontology, many people today that I encounter also use it to refer to abstract thought or "spiritual" ideas. I usually use their word against them to get them to admit man has a soul and is not a biochemical robot. There is a ghost in the machine . .


----------



## Puritan Sailor (Oct 29, 2005)

True. I'll have to remember that point the next time I encounter the argument


----------

