The Self-Evidence Of Logic

Even if we doubted everything around us--our sense perceptions of the external world, the existence of God, the existence of objective right and wrong--there are some truths we cannot avoid.  The very act of attempting to escape from them only proves that these truths exist and are binding.  We call these axioms; their nature is such that the reason we cannot escape them is because they are self-evident and self-verifying.

Some examples of axioms include:


1).  Truth exists.

2).  I can know something.

3).  Words can convey truth.


The moment anyone denies these three things they have already proven them.  No matter how much effort some people invest into trying to reject or dismiss these three facts, their questioning only confirms them.  It is impossible for there to be no such thing as truth, for one who disposes of the idea of truth really believes it is true that there is no truth--that the way things are is that there is no way things are.  Similarly, it is impossible to know nothing, because anyone who claims to know "nothing" has to know the fact that he or she is unaware of objective reality and thus claims to know something [1], meaning that at least one truth is knowable.  And lastly, anyone who argues that words cannot convey truth must use words to promote their idea to others, an idea which, if correct, is true.  Any alternative to these three claims will be unable to escape their veracity and omnipresence.

There exists a small minority of people who will question even the legitimacy of logic itself, a futile and self-condemning quest.  I want to explain why logic is self-evident in a manner identical to the two axioms I presented above.

If logic is not necessarily true and therefore any conclusion reached by logic is unreliable (note that one must still use what is called deductive reasoning to even connect the premise that logic is faulty to the following conclusion), then the conclusion that logic is unreliable is uncertain because an argument using logic was necessary to reach it, and thus I have no reason to even consider the argument correct or plausible in any way.  Any argument against reason must inevitably utilize the principles of reason in order to attack it; any assault on the veracity or reliability of logic must inescapably use logic in order to conclude that logic is faulty.  No one can question or criticize the use of premises to form conclusions (deductive reasoning) without asserting premises which allegedly lead to the conclusion that concepts such as deductive reasoning are invalid or untrustworthy.  If someone tries to dethrone the self-evident nature of reason, he or she believes there is reason to disregard it, thus contradicting himself or herself at the most foundational level.  Anyone who denies the three laws of logic will by necessity have to use those very three laws in their alleged refutation of them.  In contrast to logical facts, and to my great personal distress, scientific truths, theological truths, and moral truths are not self-evident, as only logical principles and axioms can possess this quality.  I wish the reality of this point was different, but it is absurd to deny it.

Logic, deductive reasoning (use of premises to form a conclusion), and the existence of reason are entirely self-evident.  It is futile, irrational, and inconsistent to deny or dismiss them.  These axiomatic and self-verifying principles form the cornerstone of all coherent ideas and epistemology, immutable and invulnerable guardians of truth and knowledge.  It is through logic that the skeptic can begin to comprehend the transcendent by finding self-evident and self-verifying truths.  The one who doubts everything about his or her perception of truth is forced to rely on these principles in the endeavor, demonstrating that the core of reality is not merely knowable--there is no legitimate way to not know it.


[1].  Skeptics possess awareness that they know some things in addition to the fact that they are aware of their own existence.  The existence of the mind of the self is another inescapable axiomatic truth.  No one can doubt their own existence without by necessity existing in order to even doubt it, as Descartes realized, immortalizing his revelation with his renowned phrase "Cogito ergo sum" ("I think, therefore I am").