The 3 Self-Evident Principles of Reason

1. The 3 Self-Evident Principles of Reason Aristotle

2. The study of first causes • Philosophy is not investigative…not resolved on the level of sensation…it rather begins with ordinary experiences and ascends towards universal principles… • Philosophical reasoning is valid through reason alone, and it reasons on the basis of universal principles to make conclusions… • Each principle is presupposed whenever we begin know anything at all…

3. The Principle of Identity • Each being (state of being) is what it is… • Without the principle of identity one could not begin know anything as it is… • It can not be true for “what is” and “what is not” to mean the same thing… • If so, then one could not be able to distinguish between anything at all… • A carrot is a carrot, not a watermelon…

4. Identity • If we are to deny the principle of identity then nothing would exist determinately… • Everything would be indeterminate… • If so, then nothing would be determinately known as it is, and knowledge would be impossible… • Nobody would be able to distinguish between anything determinately…and, nobody would have an opinion because knowledge would be impossible…

5. The Principle of Non-Contradiction • Nothing can both be and not be at the same time and in the same respect… • Nothing can be both true and false at the same time… • The principle of identity and non-contradiction are related in this aspect… • If one denies the principle of identity, then one has to deny the principle of non-contradiction and vice versa…

6. Non-Contradiction con’t • To deny the principle of non-contradiction leads to an absurd state of affairs… • Because one would have to use the principle in order to deny it…in other words, I would have to hold that denying non-contradiction is just as true as affirming it… • My denying the principle would mean nothing at all… • What would this bear upon?

7. Non-Contradiction con’t • Example: What would you do if you look outside tomorrow morning and there was 5 feet of snow on the ground? • What would you do? Is this absurd? • Why accept these 2 principles, even if we can reason their force of necessities? • Cornerstones? • What is our education system based on?

8. The Principle of the Excluded Middle • Either it is (has being) or it is not (has no being), there is no in between… • What could possible exist between a state of being and a state of non-being? • It is suggested that the term “becoming” is that which is in between the two states…

9. The Principle of the Excluded Middle • This can not be true, because the term “becoming” refers to change…some existing “thing” that is changing to become something else… • The term “thing” refers to something in a state of being…..it must first “be” in order to change into something else – some other state of being • Example: a solid – to a liquid – to a gas… • What about a seed?

10. Denying truth is Absurd • Phrases such as: “What is true for you might not be true for me”…“You have your truth, and I have mine” • Statements like these imply that truth becomes entirely subjective… • Absurd statements imply living in an absurd world…no trust, no structure…chaotic? • One must ask exactly what these statements are in reference towards…such as the debate between Adler and Russell…

11. Absurd Living… • We have already shown that to make the statements “There is no truth” and “We hold no truth in common” are both self-refuting… • So, to continue to argue in favour of these statements is entirely absurd…because it goes against self-evident principles… • Further evidence: imagine a world where the principle of non-contradiction did not apply… • If you have a driver license it means that you’re not allowed to drive…and if you don’t have your license you may drive anything you like… • Do you actually need your license to drive?

12. The Principle of Causality • Why are the self-evident? • The effect (on/of something) cannot be greater than the cause…nothing comes from nothing…something has to come from something else… • A thing cannot give what it does not have! • To deny this principle would imply that something comes from nothing… • Something being from a state of non-being…

13. The Principle of Causality con’t • Example: if you pour a 5 ounce glass of water into an empty glass what would you expect? • There should be exactly 5 ounces of water or less in the empty glass…can there be 5 plus ounces of water from one glass to another… • Where did the extra water come from? • A thing can only give what it has… • To say that something has come from nothing is absurd…or that nothing is something • Theory of Evolution – Intelligent Design

14. To Conclude… • It would be very difficult to deductively reason any ordinary experience on behalf of Logical statements without accepting these principles… • It would be an absurd and unintelligible world in which knowledge and communication would be impossible… • So we can conclude that there is truth along with universal truths that we all hold in common… • It is impossible to deny the existence of truth…