So in Lesson 6 we read, "To understand a belief, we need to understand the reasons that point to it. We keep track of our reasons in our heads, even though we may not be aware we're doing this."

Lesson 7 leads us beyond stating positive reasons for a belief to examining what in epistemology are called "defeaters." The book states, "It is not good enough to have convincing reasons for the things you believe. If you want to have a strong position, then you need to anticipate opposing arguments and prepare counter arguments." Strictly within the realm of logical argumentation, this is certainly true. But is it more broadly applicable?

Indeed, it could lead someone to believe that it is not possible to know something or it is inappropriate to believe something unless we have explicit and expressed (and sufficiently good) reasons for doing so. This would be something akin to epistemological evidentialism or foundationalism, views the Christian philosopher Alvin Plantinga has done much to combat in his series on warrant and Christian belief.

If this were the sort of role that the Bluedorns were advocating for logic and reason in the Christian life it would be very problematic. The book leaves the verdict somewhat ambiguous in my opinion, but their comments elsewhere clear up any mysteries.

"Just because someone is very intelligent and is very logical, it doesn't mean that they have the truth," says Hans in an interview. This gets at an appropriately circumscribed Christian view of logic and reasoning, as articulated by G. K. Chesterton, for example.

Chesterton states, "Logic and truth, as a matter of fact, have very little to do with each other. Logic is concerned merely with the fidelity and accuracy with which a certain process is performed, a process which can be performed with any materials, with any assumption. You can be as logical about griffins and basilisks as about sheep and pigs." Indeed, "Logic, then, is not necessarily an instrument for finding truth; on the contrary, truth is necessarily an instrument for using logic - for using it, that is, for the discovery of further truth and for the profit of humanity. Briefly, you can only find truth with logic if you have already found truth without it."

The book would do better to more clearly illustrate the role of logic in its traditional Christian role as "handmaiden" to Christian belief, or theology. But given the intended audience, and the overall tone of the book, this is a rather small criticism. After all, logic is identified in the title and throughout the book as a tool, and very important one, but a tool nonetheless.

The Bluedorns have certainly achieved their goal of creating a logic textbook that is neither boring nor distant, but rather informative, approachable, enjoyable, and valuable. This little book could admirably play a large and important role in the education of any child.

Edited: PC
Visit my home blog here: The Acton Institute PowerBlog