Origin of Articles

[elunico13]

The evolutionist can't give RATIONAL justification for the law of uniformity, laws of logic, morality, etc... It is then arbitrary like Santa Clause.

This is the "nyth nyth you don't know everything therefore Jesus" part of the "argument".

The entire line of thinking also smacks of Ad Hominem Tu Quoque. "Oh yeah, well, science and reason are articles of faith too!" This is a fallacy because you've done nothing to justify your religious faith. You simply are offering a "you too" distraction.

Additionally, you brushed aside my explanation that "laws of logic" are not external forces or a divine hand. They are observations of how our universe works. If the universe operated differently, the "laws" would be different. It's like a puddle in a hole. You are looking at the borders of the puddle and noting how the hole is perfectly formed to contain the puddle as it is currently shaped, not realizing that the puddle has shaped to fill the hole. I also used an analogy of the ruler and how it measures distance. It doesn't create rules of distance, it simply measures it.

As far as your strawberry ice cream analogy. If science and logic worked like people's taste buds then I guess science and logic wouldn't exist. It would all be personal preference and that would destroy science and logic.

Not surprisingly you missed the point. Let me go a little more slowly...

The presuppositional argument against rational thinking goes something like this:

"Explain why you use science and reason"
"It works. It delivers the goods."
"But that's circular reasoning. You say it works because it works."

And applied to the ice cream analogy:

"Explain why you like strawberry ice cream"
"Because I like the sensations it produces on my taste buds."
"But that's circular reasoning. You say you like it because you like it."

I use the ice cream analogy to try to explain to you why the charge of "circular reasoning" doesn't apply when we are discussing what is proven to work to the satisfaction of the individual consumer. If something is shown to produce the desired results, it's not circular reasoning to use the results as the justification for using the product. That's the desire of the end consumer.

For example, I like living in a society that can cure diseases and double my life expectancy. I can't justify logically why living longer and having a better quality of life is desirable. It just is my preference as a consumer.

Two proverbial products sit on the shelf in the "worldview" store:
1. Science and Reason
2. Religion and Magical Thinking

Which one will I buy? The first produces my desired results. The second does not.

So as you demand that I justify my use of product #1 above, I will tell you it produces the results. If that's "circular reasoning" to you, I'll tell you to go buy product #2 and leave me alone.

What is this an infomercial LOL?

I keep getting the "it works, it works" answer.

It becomes vicious circular reasoning when you use your senses to validate your senses, your reason to validate your reason.

Viciously circular reasoning - Occurs when one attempts to infer a conclusion that is based upon a premise that ultimately contains the conclusion itself.

BTW - I've got a craving for some strawberry ice cream.