Does/Can Logic prove/disprove God?

[bowmore]

Yes, but notice that Logical does not means Correct

Why the capitalization of the words logic and correct? Just  wondering...

Perhaps I should address the OP a bit more clearly :

f God exists can he/she/it proved by Logic or not?

That largely depends on what premises and definitions you start from.

If God exists can he defies Logic?

As logic is a human-made formal system that tries to describe reality, it is possible that certain things lie outside that system.
In fact Gödel's incompleteness theorems guarantee that.

But since logic is so tightly coupled with our language it becomes very hard to describe or even meaningfully speak about things that defy logic.

Do we have an agreement on the Basis of Logic or not? can we formalized some rules regarding Logic?

I think mathematics has already done it's fair share in this field. Logic is largely formalized. Just an example here

[Zarathustra]

Hi guys I'm an expert in Logic and would like to help every one here (Atheists/Theists) to find the truth

Are you for real? I know a little about logic myself, and so far I haven't seen any from your hand!
And if you really are an expert on logic: Why do you propose to know the truth???
Please...
And by the way isn't that an illogical claim, when you also claim this:

Yes, but notice that Logical does not mean Correct

Come on... what are you really here to say? And why not fill out your worldview truthfully??? If you are a logician, then its your trade, not your worldview. It all appears a bit devious to me.

[bowmore]

No, the statement "God created himself" fails by itself

So you claim it's truth does not depend on the definitions of the words 'god' and 'to create' ?

What is logic? Odd question from a logician  

I know, I just want to know what is yours

I see no need to redefine it, so I'll just give you the wiki definition

"Logic is the study of the principles of valid demonstration and inference."

In order to determine the truth of a statement it must depend on premises whose truth is known.
Based on the premises you've given me so far, I don't think it is possible to logically prove that a god can or cannot exist.

We are not talking about truth or even does God exist or not!
We are talking about Logic and will it be possible to prove or disprove God using it

Since logic merely describes what valid inference is, and does not dictate what your starting premises should be, I'd say everything can be proven or disproven, depending on your starting premises and definitions.

First we need to formalize Logic, then we have a common base to start with

Luckily this basis has been laid out already.

[Tanker]

Damn it I just wrote out a long piece on the poster needing to set the limits for the discussion and what logic is and how debate works and it diddn't post. I made some good points too. Well I'm not rewriting it Short verion you set the subect YOU set the limits of said dicussion or it totaly pointless.

[Tanker]

I'm not sure what your world view is but this forum incourages all faiths, beliefs and denomanations. Not saying you're an undercover theist but your kinda coming off that way. If you belive in god fine, if you don't fine. but It's hard to discuss religion with you not knowing your beliefs. We do have theists on this forum Titan is a prolific poster and a christian.

[Zarathustra]

First we need to formalize Logic, then we have a common base to start with

As I said, I already know formal logic. So let's use the standard rules of inference for sentential logic and rules of inference for first-order logic. There... all done... I have formalized logic, you can begin   (I don't claim to be an "expert" though, I just took formal logic for a couple of terms.)

[Sophus]

I believe logic is the only tool to bring a verdict on any affair, including the existence of a god. However, "De-Nile" ain't just a river in Egypt. Letting go of theism isn't easy for most.

[Zarathustra]

I believe logic is the only tool to bring a verdict on any affair, including the existence of a god. However, "De-Nile" ain't just a river in Egypt. Letting go of theism isn't easy for most.

Yeah, it was a long and hard road for me as well.  

Looks like Messenger vanished as soon as I adressed him. Too bad. Maybe he didn't want to show true colors yet.

[Sophus]

How about trial and error? Inductive reasoning, etc?

I like your thinking but I would say those both direct to logic as they are both systems of reasoning.

[Kyuuketsuki]

FWIW no ... outside of math I don't think logic alone can prove anything, I think it takes evidence to do that (and even that doesn't actually *prove* things simply changes the probability). It's the old deductive vs inductive reasoning argument.

Kyu

[Zarathustra]

FWIW no ... outside of math I don't think logic alone can prove anything, I think it takes evidence to do that (and even that doesn't actually *prove* things simply changes the probability). It's the old deductive vs inductive reasoning argument.

Kyu

Yup. I agree. My point is that they are not opposed. They correlate eachother, which is also what Sophus ment I think. He just gave logic a higher status, than the others and I don't agree. I think they are equal, and mutually dependant.

[Messenger]

Are you for real? I know a little about logic myself, and so far I haven't seen any from your hand!
And if you really are an expert on logic: Why do you propose to know the truth???

Because I can prove it!

Come on... what are you really here to say? And why not fill out your worldview truthfully??? If you are a logician, then its your trade, not your worldview. It all appears a bit devious to me.

Usually people oppose what they don't know, Logic can prove everything about religion
Science, mathematics, etc. can prove correctness of most things after that

[Messenger]

First we need to formalize Logic, then we have a common base to start with

As I said, I already know formal logic. So let's use the standard rules of inference for sentential logic and rules of inference for first-order logic. There... all done... I have formalized logic, you can begin   (I don't claim to be an "expert" though, I just took formal logic for a couple of terms.)

What are you proposing is description for Logic or Logical rules not a definition
We are looking for a definition (A criteria) that we can use against any statement to test if it is logical or not

For example If we want to define a circle
A continuous line of a set of points that have a fixed distance (the radius) from a fixed point (the center).
then we can test any shape if it is a circle or not using this definition.

Can we do the same with Logic?

I'll give you some hints
S1- All apples are blue
S2- All apples are red, my apple is green
S3-USA area is 4 Million Km, Texas area is 5 Millions Km, Texas is part of USA
Which statements are logical and which are not?

[bowmore]

What are you proposing is description for Logic or Logical rules not a definition
We are looking for a definition (A criteria) that we can use against any statement to test if it is logical or not

This statement alone is enough indication that you haven't the foggiest.

For example If we want to define a circle
A continuous line of a set of points that have a fixed distance (the radius) from a fixed point (the center).
then we can test any shape if it is a circle or not using this definition.

By itself this definition is not enough to do that. Some of the terms used in the definition require a definition of their own.

Can we do the same with Logic?

I'll give you some hints
S1- All apples are blue
S2- All apples are red, my apple is green
S3-USA area is 4 Million Km, Texas area is 5 Millions Km, Texas is part of USA
Which statements are logical and which are not?

I'd really like to see where you're going with this.

[Messenger]

No, the statement "God created himself" fails by itself

So you claim it's truth does not depend on the definitions of the words 'god' and 'to create' ?

No, it is the opposite, I claim it is false regardless of the definition of God, but it relies somehow on the definition of "create"

I see no need to redefine it, so I'll just give you the wiki definition
"Logic is the study of the principles of valid demonstration and inference."

We need a test criteria, not a description, can you try again?

In order to determine the truth of a statement it must depend on premises whose truth is known.
Based on the premises you've given me so far, I don't think it is possible to logically prove that a god can or cannot exist.

Good start, but let's go step by step, first we define logic

Since logic merely describes what valid inference is, and does not dictate what your starting premises should be, I'd say everything can be proven or disproved, depending on your starting premises and definitions.

Absolutely correct, we need some FACT(s)+ LOGIC to prove/disprove anything
but sometimes we can disprove something without any fact; if it is illogical