Logic and Evidence Must Support Each Other and Work Together
Kevin R. Henke
September 26, 2022
Lundahl (2022r) skips over a number of my essays without comment:
Henke (2022ad): “Why Can’t Mr. Lundahl Comprehend My Essays? Lundahl (2022e), (2022f), (2022i), (2022j), (2022k), (2022L) and (2022m) Keep Mistakenly Discussing “Proof” and “Proving” When I Only Asked Him to Provide Demonstrable Evidence”
Henke (2022ae): “Contrary to the Misrepresentations in Lundahl (2022i; 2022L), I Don’t Say that Miracles or Other Supernatural Events are Impossible”
Henke (2022af): “God’s Actions Need Not Always be Miraculous”
Henke (2022ag): “Mr. Lundahl Made a Big Mistake in Even Mentioning David Copperfield in Lundahl (2022a) and He Ignored the Numerous Times I Said that Mr. Lundahl was Only Making a Suggestion that Demons Help David Copperfield Do His Magic Tricks”
Henke (2022ah): “Angels at Jesus’ Feet: Lundahl (2022i) is Open to that Possibility”
Henke (2002ai): “Lundahl (2022i) Misinterprets and Improperly Limits the Effects of Gravity”
In Henke (2022aj), I discuss how logic and historical/scientific evidence must support each other when investigating a claim and not be separated into different debates as Lundahl (2022i) mistakenly believes. I stated the following in Henke (2022aj):
“Similarly, science and valid history must be based on logic. Let’s say on Tuesday, you make the following observation:
Observation #1: Lions are animals.
On Saturday, you make a second observation:
Observation #2: Some animals are dogs.
Anyone with a superficial knowledge of biology knows that both of these statements by themselves are true. However, the statements may be improperly combined to produce an illogical conclusion:
Some animals are dogs,
Lions are animals,
Therefore, lions are dogs.”
Lundahl (2022r) then further defines and discusses the logical fallacy, which is fine:
“The improper combination is technically known as an invalid syllogism. The middle term cannot be twice undistributed in a valid one. Now a term can be distributed in two ways : by being subject in a sentence with "all" or "no" or by being predicate in one with "no" or "not all" for the subject. In the major, it is undistributed because it is in a proposition with "some" and not one with "all" and in the minor, it is undistributed as predicate of a proposition that is affirmative and not negative.”
In Henke (2022aj), I further state:
“Philosophy and history cannot and should not be separated into two different debates as Lundahl (2022i) mistakenly believes. They must be part of the same debate.”
“Not the least, see previous.
Or at least, the parts should be sufficiently distinct.”
No, Mr. Lundahl, you’ve wasted a lot of time. You failed to make any realistic statements about Genesis 3 because your philosophy doesn’t have a shred of historical or scientific evidence to support it.