Logical Assumptions

Everyone makes some assumptions.  It’s not wrong to make assumptions, as long as we know what assumptions we are making and know that they are solid, logical, and essential.  Often, people misunderstand scientists as being people who are objective, unbiased, and always right, but that’s simply not the case; scientists are fallible humans who are making some pretty hefty assumptions.

                For instance, let’s say that a scientist is studying gravity, so he picks up a book and drops it on the floor.  He repeats this process twenty times and, since the book always hit the floor, he concludes that if a person drops an object it will fall.  Now let’s make a list of some of the things he is assuming in this experiment: 1)that he is real,  2) that the book is real,  3) that his senses are basically reliable(e.g., he can see the book and hear it hit the floor), 4)that laws of nature are constant,  5) that they are universally applicable,  6) that his memory of the book falling is basically reliable, and 7) that he can use logic to come to a conclusion based on his observations.

                Did you have any idea that we are making so many assumptions in even the simplest scientific experiment?  I’d love to go into each of the seven assumptions I mentioned, but you probably would not read this if it was that long, so I will focus on the most important assumption I listed, assumption #7.  Our scientist in question, who is studying gravity, assumes that he can use logic to come to a conclusion based on his observations (he is also assuming that other people will come to the same conclusions, based on the same laws of logic).  But is this a reasonable assumption to make?  Only if our scientist believes in Biblical creation is logic, well, logical!

                I am fully convinced that God created the entire universe in six literal 24-hour days about six thousand years ago.  But, to get my point across, let’s assume temporarily that everything evolved over millions of years like most secular scientist would like us to believe.  If our gravity-studying scientist had evolved where did logic come from?  Survival of the fittest cannot explain logic, because logic is universal and exists whether or not we use it.  Laws of logic are constant; they can never change (that’s why they are laws).  Without a loving God who created man in His image and gave us laws of logic as a reflection of the way He thinks,  people could never use logic to make sense of anything in the world around them.  Laws of logic are a strictly creationist concept, but every evolutionist must use them.  An evolutionist must assume laws of logic (and therefore Biblical creation) in order to make a case against Biblical creation.  So evolutionists must assume creation in order to argue against it.  Here is your creation clue of the week – logic!