Thursday, July 24, 2008

That Peculiar Logic of Darkness

Darkness has a logic all of its own that is shaped to the contours of the boundary between the seen and the unseen. Here, at the liminal extreme of our knowledge, reasons breaks down as if in a moral singularity. Maybe there is some truth after all in my mother's adage that the Holy Ghost goes to bed after midnight. It seems that as one goes away from the Light, the Logic of Darkness takes over bit by bit. It begins with rationalization. As the Poet said:


Vice is a monster of so frightful mien,
As to be hated needs but to be seen;
Yet seen too oft, familiar with her face,
We first endure, then pity, then embrace.
~Alexander Pope, from "Essay on Man"
This is because logic is a tool and not an end of knowledge. It constructs our thoughts as a blue print guides a mason. It is however, no more the edifice than that lined paper is. With logic we can see the ends of thoughts and their relationships with one another, but we cannot know through logic.
Knowledge is a priori and can only be organized. Truth exists in and through itself independent in the universe, though each of us can only grasp a small portion of it. Ultimately, logic is limited in its ability to convince, because the assumptions that our beliefs, independent of any intellectual framework, are deeply held and difficult to change. Argument is so often doomed to failure because people cannot agree on the very epistemology that would permit them to discuss an issue within a shared logical framework. A theist and a secularist fundamentally disagree on what constitutes truth and the source for deriving truth and so can not easily discuss any topic unless one or the other yields to the epistemology of the other. In our society, it is often the theist that must yield to the secularist.

Hence, the logic of Darkness is not really different from the Logic of Light. Rather, the same framework houses very different buildings. The same logic can lead to very different conclusions when different ideas are plugged in. Consider a simple arithmetic formula. 2x=y. The value of y is dependent on the value of x. If x were 2 than y would equal 4, but if x were 450, the y would be 900. So it is with logic. Two conclusions can both be equally valid logically, but completely contradictory. Consider the simple syllogism: All tall men play basketball well; Jon is tall; therefore, Jon plays basketball well. This is logically valid, but utterly false since I play basketball abysmally. The error lies not in the logic, which is correct, but in the assumption that all tall men play basketball well.

Such errors can compound themselves. Joseph Smith once remarked that if a person starts right, it is easy to continue right, but if that first step is wrong, it is all the more difficult to get on the correct path. He was speaking of arguments. It is the fundamentals that matter most. Our conclusions are only as good as the assumptions that go into them.

We read in the Book of Mormon, in chapter 4 of Alma, that the Prophet Alma gave up the Chief judgeship to become a missionary among his people because he was afraid they were going astray. This well educated, erudite man of business and government, however, did not try to argue the people to his side.

And this he did that he himself might go forth among his people, or among the people of Nephi, that he might preach the word of God unto them, to stir them up in remembrance of their duty, and that he might pull down, by the word of God, all the pride and craftiness and all the contentions which were among his people, seeing no way that he might reclaim them save it were in bearing down in pure testimony against them. (Alma 4:19)
Alma saw that only bearing testimony could turn people around. The only people with whom you can discuss things logically are those with whom you share enough common assumptions to make your logic accessible to your interlocutor. Only the meek and humble will listen to someone whose basic assumptions about the truth are at odds with their own. Thus Paul tells us that faith comes by hearing the word of God (Romans 10:14-17) preached by those who are sent. The Doctrine and Covenants tells us, "of tenets thou shalt not talk, but thou shalt declare repentance and faith on the Savior, and remission of sins by baptism, and by fire, yea, even the Holy Ghost. (D&C 19:31). This is not that we should hide our beliefs, but rather it is an acknowledgment that debating doctrine and tenets is a futile spinning of one's wheels.

So, as always, let me end by saying that we should listen more than we speak, and ask more than we answer.

No comments: