5

John Lennox's idea is that we would have no reason to believe our own logical conclusions if nature, and therefore the brain itself, was deterministic. He says (40:15 - 40:48) that there would be no reason to trust our own logic if was based on the "unguided" and "random" processes of a materialistic world. First, John Lennox, during the ...


4

"If hard determinism is true, and our thoughts are merely the results of a causal chain of atomic interactions, are reason and logic illusory?" Lennox is not speaking about "hard determinism" in the section you've referenced. He speaks of a process that is "unguided" and "random", calling attention to the blindness of ...


3

"If hard determinism is true, and our thoughts are merely the results of a causal chain of atomic interactions, are reason and logic illusory?" In the sense Lennox is talking about, no. Reason and logic can arise deterministically if you set up a system that deterministically evolves by pruning out anything irrational and illogical. Lennox relies ...


3

Welcome, don. Thanks for a nice, reflective question. The cogito has much less importance for Descartes than is commonly supposed. Its significance is twofold: (1) it is (merely) the first truth which Descartes has come upon which (as he supposes) 'is necessarily true whenever it is put forward by me or conceived in my mind' (Med. II: Cottingham, II: 17). (2)...


2

It depends on the understanding of rational. The question scope is too broad, so it makes an ill-formed question for this forum. In general, something rational is just related to reason. And reason is not always logical. For example, a lot of people make rational decisions (that is, they develop a set of reasons) which are not logical and lead to poverty. ...


2

The term 'morality' refers to a (any) systematic approach to 'proper' behavior in human society. In general, it establishes a set of human values, outlines how those values can be achieved, and offers some justifications for its value structures and practices. The troublesome aspect of this definition is the scare-quoted term 'proper'. Speaking ...


1

Computers are the embodiment of deterministic rationality. If computers are programmed properly for rational analysis, determinism is no handicap. However, if the computer was running an app consisting of random lines of code, it would be foolish to trust its logic. Even the discipline of evolutionary programming requires careful construction of evaluation ...


1

I have since learned that Dawkins addressed a similar question in another conversation he had with Lennox, this time at the Oxford Museum of Natural History: Has Science Buried God? (14:10). It supports some of what has been posted in other answers. Lennox: "It seems to me that your atheism undermines the very rationality that I assume and you assume ...


1

Based on what you said: Thus, morality in my understanding does not depend on context, culture, time, place etc. However, I believe rationality is context dependent. Sometimes an immoral action can be justified as rational action depending on situations. For example, killing to save owns life. Murder is always immoral but may be ration in some cases. If ...


1

The relationship between reason and morality is most extensively and famously addressed in Kant's "Critique of Practical Reason." In this context, "practical" refers to judgments of morality or the determination of proper actions. To understand the connection really brings in the whole Kantian system, on which I'm no expert, but let me ...


1

Having read a bit further in the book, I think I have come to an answer that I'm happier with. Later on, Parfit discusses consequentialism, which says that people should aim to make outcomes as good as possible (overall). He points out that it is possible that the most moral disposition might cause you to act immorally. He gives the example of a mother who ...


1

In philosophy the justification for your above first claim ultimately lies in a school of thought in epistemology about the self, namely Rational egoism. Please note it's a kind of normative (prescribes what one ought to do), not descriptive egoism (describe what one naturally does). Also it should not be confused with Ethical egoism, which explores from a ...


1

I don't think that Descartes: tried to prove that he existed from the fact that he was thinking. Rather, he tried to remove errors in his thinking by assuming a skeptical stance toward anything that he thought one might reasonably doubt. Then discovered for himself (although he likely read it beforehand) that he could not reasonably doubt his own existence,...


1

Always try to confirm or to refute your own conjectures. Be aware that also humans - alike all species - have their border of cognitive capabilities.


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible