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 reasonable, but few people understand how to do so effectively. Logic refers to the rules of good thinking. Understanding some simple rules will help you know when to accept someone’s beliefs and when to doubt them. It also helps individuals evaluate their own beliefs or seek additional evidence. 

In the academic world, there are many professors who are well known and respected, and we tend to accept whatever they say without evaluating. For example, Richard Dawkins is famous, confident, and boldly criticizes Christianity. But should we accept this well-known scientist’s beliefs about extra-terrestrial aliens coming to Earth and planting life on our planet? To cut down on the boredom of my writing, I refer to him as the Professor of Extra Terrestrial (PET) many professors are well known and respected, and we tend to accept whatever they say without evaluating it. 

How about Dr. Peter Boghossian, a once-beloved professor of philosophy at Portland State University? He specializes in logical fallacies and knows more of them than I do. In his criticism, he would certainly not deceive his students, whose parents had spent a lot of money on their education and preparation for life. He wouldn’t use flawed logic to fool people, would he? Well, he authored an article that was published online titled "The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct." Seriously? Yes he did. 

In the article, he explained how the penis was a cause of global warming. Somehow ( I think I missed a day in sex ed), I didn't have a clue, but people accepted this as true. In fact, he was quite popular until he admitted it was a hoax. His popularity then tanked, and the love turned to hate. When he used the same fallacies to criticize Christianity, he was loved. Obviously, we need ways to examine people's statements.

Is there a way to spot information that is meant to fool others? It is logic. An organized way of separating bad information

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

When evaluating an argument, we determine whether the premises logically infer the conclusion and then assess the validity of those premises. If the premises are more likely true than false or more likely true than their detractors claim, the argument is considered sound. It is important to understand that an argument is not the same as proof, because outside of mathematics, very few things can be proven with absolute certainty. Another important type of reasoning is the inductive argument. which is the backbone of science. The premises in this type of logic can be strong or weak, and the conclusion is considered cogent or uncogent. In inductive reasoning, science always looks for more information or additional premises to support a conclusion. For example, this website reviews the Big Bang theory in its discussion of evidence for God’s existence. The premises include Einstein’s theory of relativity, cosmic background radiation, Hubble’s observations of the expanding universe, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Each premise is strong, but none of them will ever be accepted as absolute proof. The theory appears solid, but the word “proof” is not used—and never will be—because science will always search for new evidence, not final proof.

The Socrates argument mentioned earlier is a deductive argument. It is frequently used because it is simple and clear. In a good deductive argument, the premises are valid, and the conclusion is logically inferred from them. The argument is sound because the premises are valid and the conclusion follows. Again, this does not mean it is absolute proof that Socrates was mortal. However, if the premises are valid and the logic is correct, the conclusion cannot be false. The form of Socrates’s argument is known as a syllogism, meaning it contains two premises and one conclusion. If the premises are more likely true than not, and the conclusion is correctly inferred, the argument is sound.

A logical fallacy is an argument that contains an error in reasoning. The fallacy may be intentional or simply a mistake. When arguments for the existence of God appear online, many other sites claim that these arguments are not sound. Everyone needs to be able to evaluate arguments and determine whether they are sound. I will provide examples of opposing fallacies and the errors they contain.