Logical Absolutes and TAG Part 1

I recently have been exploring logic, and its various applications and uses (of which there are a myriad). Especially in light of the Transcendental Argument for God (TAG), as expoused by the good folks over at www.carm.org (Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry). They give an in depth overview of TAG here, and, while it certainly is not flawless, may be the best argument for God that I have heard yet. However, it does contain various logical fallacies, resulting in TAG losing some of its original luster.

To better understand the argument, I decided that I first needed to better understand logic. As is explained on the website, the three rules of logic, the Law of Identity, the Law of Non-Contradiction, and the Law of Excluded Middle are what are known as "logical absolutes", creating the framework for the application of logic itself. While is fairy easy to grasp, CARM attempts to use the existence of these logical absolutes as proof for the existence of (their version, at least) God.

While I would agree that these three rules of logic are indeed absolute, the source of their absolute-ness (for lack of a better word) is a slippery subject. What TAG does is attempt to prove that they are conceptual in nature, and that concepts require a mind to create them, and since humans did not create the logical absolutes, some other "mind" must have, leading to the existence of their god. However, there are many holes in their argument, and in future posts I will begin to pick it apart, but for now I would like to being with a basic understanding of logic and logical absolutes.

The term logic refers to the application of the concepts of logic and the logical absolutes. For example, the truth-statement "an apple is an apple" is logical valid and sound. However, the statement "an apple is not an apple" violates the Law of Identity and Non-Contradiction. So, for the assertion that God exists, there are two logical possibilities: God does exist or God does not exist. God cannot both exist and not exist at the same time, due to the Law of Excluded Middle.

So when we have these two possibilities, God exists or God does not exist, we have logic to thank for that. The application of logic, based on the logical absolutes, has lead us to a valid and sound truth statement: There either is a God or there is not a God. What we do with this conclusion afterward does not necessarily rely on logic. What is interesting about Carm's TAG argument is that they violate the same logical rules they just expounded in the beginning of the argument. I will save the rest of this post until tomorrow, but I would welcome any feedback on CARM or TAG or logic in the meantime, as I am still attempting to educate myself in these matters.