Peter 3:15 . Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for t

Just about everyone believes they are logical and are good thinkers, but few people understand how to do so. Logic refers to the rules of good thinking. Understanding some simple rules will help you know when to accept someone's beliefs or when to doubt them. It also lets someone take their own beliefs or seek additional evidence. Richard Dawkins (RD) is famous, quite confident, and boldly criticizes religion.   Should we accept this famous scientist's beliefs about the sneaky aliens coming to Earth and planting life on our planet?

How about Dr Peter Boghossion, a one-time beloved professor of philosophy at Portland State University? He has a better understanding of logic than me and certainly would not deceive his students whose parents spent a lot of money on education and preparation for life. He wouldn't lie, would he?

I will cover two simple types of thinking and the terms used to understand them: deductive and inductive. For example, Socrates's argument above contains two premises and a conclusion. In logic, the argument is not an emotional discussion between people but simply an organized method of finding information about a topic. It includes premises (pieces of information) and a conclusion. Is this a good argument?

In evaluating the argument, we determine whether the premises infer the conclusion and then assess the validity of the premises. The conclusion is inferred from the premises. Then, we check the validity of the premises. If the premises are more likely true than their opposite or more likely than their detractors, the argument is sound. It is important to understand the argument is not proof because, other than mathematics, very few things are proof. Another type of argument is an inductive argument.

An inductive argument is the basis of science. The premises in this type of logic are strong or weak, and the conclusion is cogent or uncogent. With this type of logic, science always looks for more information or premises to support their conclusion. Part of this website reviews the Big Bang theory in the evidence for God's existence.  The premises are based on Einstein's theory of relativity, Cosmic Background Radiation, the Hubble Telescope of the expanding universe, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics.  Each premise is strong, but it will never be accepted as proof.  The theory seems solid, but the word proof is not used and never will be. Science will always search for new scientific evidence to support it, but not proof.

The Socrates argument above is a deductive argument, used here since it is simple and often used as an example. In a good deductive argument, the premises are valid, and the conclusion is inferred. Notice. The argument is sound since the premises are valid, and a conclusion is inferred. Notice again, I do not say it is absolute proof that Socrates was mortal. However, if the premises are valid and the conclusion is inferred, the conclusion cannot be wrong. 

The form of Socrates's argument is referred to as a syllogism, meaning there are two premises and one conclusion. The premises are more likely true than not, and the conclusion is inferred. 

A logical fallacy is an argument with an error in reasoning. The fallacy can be intentional or just a mistake. When arguments for the existence of God appear on the Internet, numerous other sites will claim that the arguments are not sound. Everyone needs to be able to evaluate arguments for their soundness. I will give some examples of opposing fallacies and the mistakes they contain.