What do you think?
Rate this book
Logic: A God-Centered Approach to the Foundation of Western Thought
For Christians looking to improve critical thinking skills, here is an accessible introduction to the study of logic as well as an in-depth treatment of the discipline from a professor with six academic degrees and over 30 years experience teaching. Questions for further reflection are included at the end of each chapter as well as helpful diagrams and charts for use in college and graduate-level classrooms. Vern Poythress has undertaken a radical recasting of the study of logic in this revolutionary work from a Christian worldview.
736 pages, Paperback
First published February 1, 2013
82 people are currently reading
574 people want to read
About the author
Vern Sheridan Poythress
75 books149 followersVern Sheridan Poythress was born in 1946 in Madera, California, where he lived with his parents Ransom H. Poythress and Carola N. Poythress and his older brother Kenneth R. Poythress. After teaching mathematics for a year at Fresno State College (now California State University at Fresno), he became a student at Westminster Theological Seminary, where he earned an M.Div. (1974) and a Th.M. in apologetics (1974). He received an M.Litt. in New Testament from University of Cambridge (1977) and a Th.D. in New Testament from the University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch, South Africa (1981).
He has been teaching in New Testament at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia since 1976. In 1981 he was ordained as a teaching elder in the Reformed Presbyterian Church Evangelical Synod, which has now merged with the Presbyterian Church in America.
More information about his teaching at Westminster can be found at the Westminster Seminary website.
Dr. Poythress studied linguistics and Bible translation at the Summer Institute of Linguistics in Norman Oklahoma in 1971 and 1972, and taught linguistics at the Summer Institute of Linguistics in the summers of 1974, 1975, and 1977. He has published books on Christian philosophy of science, theological method, dispensationalism, biblical law, hermeneutics, Bible translation, and Revelation. A list of publications is found on this website.
Dr. Poythress married his wife Diane in 1983, and they have two children, Ransom and Justin. He has side interests in science fiction, string figures, volleyball, and computers.
The family lived on a farm until he was five years old. When he was nine years old he made a public commitment to Christ and was baptized in Chowchilla First Baptist Church, Chowchilla, California. The family later moved to Fresno, California, and he graduated from Bullard High School in Fresno.
He earned a B.S. in mathematics from California Institute of Technology (1966) and a Ph.D. in mathematics from Harvard University (1970).
He has been teaching in New Testament at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia since 1976. In 1981 he was ordained as a teaching elder in the Reformed Presbyterian Church Evangelical Synod, which has now merged with the Presbyterian Church in America.
More information about his teaching at Westminster can be found at the Westminster Seminary website.
Dr. Poythress studied linguistics and Bible translation at the Summer Institute of Linguistics in Norman Oklahoma in 1971 and 1972, and taught linguistics at the Summer Institute of Linguistics in the summers of 1974, 1975, and 1977. He has published books on Christian philosophy of science, theological method, dispensationalism, biblical law, hermeneutics, Bible translation, and Revelation. A list of publications is found on this website.
Dr. Poythress married his wife Diane in 1983, and they have two children, Ransom and Justin. He has side interests in science fiction, string figures, volleyball, and computers.
The family lived on a farm until he was five years old. When he was nine years old he made a public commitment to Christ and was baptized in Chowchilla First Baptist Church, Chowchilla, California. The family later moved to Fresno, California, and he graduated from Bullard High School in Fresno.
He earned a B.S. in mathematics from California Institute of Technology (1966) and a Ph.D. in mathematics from Harvard University (1970).
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
December 18, 2017
Vern Poythress’s Logic is a hefty book. If you cut out the bibliography and the indices, it still clocks in at 708 pages. As such, it’s hard to review it all in one go. I’m going to try though by listing the things I particularly liked about this book and the areas in which I felt it fell short.
Pros
-This book gives a breathtaking picture of the breadth of Logic in ways that other Introductory texts that I have read do not.
-It is written from a theologically Reformed, presuppositional perspective (might not be a pro for everyone)
- The author works hard to unify all the different types of Logic (i.e. categorical logic, propositional logic, Boolean algebra, predicate logic, set theory, modal logic, etc.) and to show how they all fit together and support one another.
-The author clearly loves his material. His excitement seeps through the pages.
-The author continually attempts to show how logic relates to other fields of study such as philosophy, physics, computer programming, theology, and science.
Cons
- Even though it has over 700 pages, the book moves along at a very fast pace. Sometimes the concepts are zooming by so quickly that you might miss something because it didn’t seem significant at the time only to realize a few chapters later that the earlier concept is being used to build even more theoretical structures later on in the book. This means that there was a lot of going back and reading earlier parts of the book for me in order to follow his arguments.
- There are very few exercises for a student or reader to work through. Even thought this book was purportedly written as an introductory logic text, it doesn’t seem to have been designed with the student in mind.
- Some of the author’s theological explanations become repetitive over the course of the book. There are only so many ways to restate the relationship of logic concepts to the problem of the many and the one or to ideas of transcendence and immanence.
- Syllogisms are really shortchanged in this book. I guess if I want more syllogisms I need to get my hands on Peter Kreeft’s Socratic Logic next.
Overall, I wouldn’t recommend this for students just starting out with Logic. If this is your first encounter with Logic, I imagine it might be overwhelming. If you already have a grasp of basic Aristotelian Logic and you want to expand your idea of what Logic is and what it can do, this would be a good book to read through.
Pros
-This book gives a breathtaking picture of the breadth of Logic in ways that other Introductory texts that I have read do not.
-It is written from a theologically Reformed, presuppositional perspective (might not be a pro for everyone)
- The author works hard to unify all the different types of Logic (i.e. categorical logic, propositional logic, Boolean algebra, predicate logic, set theory, modal logic, etc.) and to show how they all fit together and support one another.
-The author clearly loves his material. His excitement seeps through the pages.
-The author continually attempts to show how logic relates to other fields of study such as philosophy, physics, computer programming, theology, and science.
Cons
- Even though it has over 700 pages, the book moves along at a very fast pace. Sometimes the concepts are zooming by so quickly that you might miss something because it didn’t seem significant at the time only to realize a few chapters later that the earlier concept is being used to build even more theoretical structures later on in the book. This means that there was a lot of going back and reading earlier parts of the book for me in order to follow his arguments.
- There are very few exercises for a student or reader to work through. Even thought this book was purportedly written as an introductory logic text, it doesn’t seem to have been designed with the student in mind.
- Some of the author’s theological explanations become repetitive over the course of the book. There are only so many ways to restate the relationship of logic concepts to the problem of the many and the one or to ideas of transcendence and immanence.
- Syllogisms are really shortchanged in this book. I guess if I want more syllogisms I need to get my hands on Peter Kreeft’s Socratic Logic next.
Overall, I wouldn’t recommend this for students just starting out with Logic. If this is your first encounter with Logic, I imagine it might be overwhelming. If you already have a grasp of basic Aristotelian Logic and you want to expand your idea of what Logic is and what it can do, this would be a good book to read through.
April 18, 2018
This isn’t a logic textbook, yet it isn’t quite a worldview approach to logic. It is something of both, yet completely neither. I still liked it, though.
He begins with a theological “grounding” of logic, which amounts to a summary of his and Frame’s approach to worldview. It’s good, but it lasts about 200 pages before you get into the “nuts and bolts” of logic.
He then gives a primer on deductive syllogisms, propositional logic, quantification, functions, sets, modal logic, and much else. I did enjoy the fact that he pointed out how pure systems like Russell’s and others are so formal as to have little content. This is analogous to the desire for “pure being.”
64: Logic is an aspect of God’s mind. It reveals God’s attributes.
89: Logic is God’s self-consistency
Key argument: Logic is personal, but it doesn’t depend on any one human person, since if all humans perished, logic would still be true. It is transcendent, displays his attributes, and is part of God’s speech (80).
This next part is important, as it provides another foundation for the rest of the book’s argument:
Axioms of Propositional Logic
Principle of Tautology: (p V p) ⊃ p
You might need to learn this one. Poythress’s work is unique in the sense that he puts every single axiom through a truth table.
Principle of Addition
q ⊃ (p V q) “If it is dark, then (either it is raining or it is dark)”
The Principle of Permutation
(p V q) ⊃ (q V p)
If (either it is raining or it is dark), then (either it is dark or it is raining)
The Associative Principle
(p V (q V r)) ⊃ (q V (p V r))
If (either it is raining or (it is dark or it is cold)), then (either it is dark or (it is raining or it is cold))
The Principle of Summation
(q ⊃ r) ⊃ ((p V q) ⊃ (p V r))
If (it is dark implies it is cold), then (the assumption that (it is raining or it is dark) implies the conclusion that (it is raining or it is cold)).
While it might not seem like it, these are powerful tools and the reader is encouraged to work through a few of them in truth tables in the appendices. The book has some severe drawbacks, in that it isn’t a logic textbook, and some important concepts are woefully underdeveloped (like modal logic). But I did enjoy it and parts of it should be read.
He begins with a theological “grounding” of logic, which amounts to a summary of his and Frame’s approach to worldview. It’s good, but it lasts about 200 pages before you get into the “nuts and bolts” of logic.
He then gives a primer on deductive syllogisms, propositional logic, quantification, functions, sets, modal logic, and much else. I did enjoy the fact that he pointed out how pure systems like Russell’s and others are so formal as to have little content. This is analogous to the desire for “pure being.”
64: Logic is an aspect of God’s mind. It reveals God’s attributes.
89: Logic is God’s self-consistency
Key argument: Logic is personal, but it doesn’t depend on any one human person, since if all humans perished, logic would still be true. It is transcendent, displays his attributes, and is part of God’s speech (80).
This next part is important, as it provides another foundation for the rest of the book’s argument:
Axioms of Propositional Logic
Principle of Tautology: (p V p) ⊃ p
You might need to learn this one. Poythress’s work is unique in the sense that he puts every single axiom through a truth table.
Principle of Addition
q ⊃ (p V q) “If it is dark, then (either it is raining or it is dark)”
The Principle of Permutation
(p V q) ⊃ (q V p)
If (either it is raining or it is dark), then (either it is dark or it is raining)
The Associative Principle
(p V (q V r)) ⊃ (q V (p V r))
If (either it is raining or (it is dark or it is cold)), then (either it is dark or (it is raining or it is cold))
The Principle of Summation
(q ⊃ r) ⊃ ((p V q) ⊃ (p V r))
If (it is dark implies it is cold), then (the assumption that (it is raining or it is dark) implies the conclusion that (it is raining or it is cold)).
While it might not seem like it, these are powerful tools and the reader is encouraged to work through a few of them in truth tables in the appendices. The book has some severe drawbacks, in that it isn’t a logic textbook, and some important concepts are woefully underdeveloped (like modal logic). But I did enjoy it and parts of it should be read.
May 16, 2024
Outside of the Bible, this has been the longest, most thought provoking, and intellectually rigorous book I have read. This book definitely helped me to sharpen my critical thinking and my ability to analyze arguments and understand the nature and relationship of logic to God and his creation. Poythress does a wonderful job of outlining the relationship between God and Logic, then proceeds to use this relationship to build up and explain different forms of logic, while critiquing their secular foundations. Poythress takes a particularly reformed and presuppositional approach to this book, which the latter is outside of my forté, but it was quite interesting to see the perspectives on God he drew from this angle and learn from the apologetic tradition.
Some of the chapters are quite quick pases and Poythress can often repeat himself at times explaining transcendence and immanence (I understand he does this because this book is meant to be able to be read from any section or chapter). The questions of reflection at the end of every chapter are wonderfully thought provoking and often challenged me to think through open ended idea questions as well as practice certain elements of logical deduction learned in the chapter.
I would give this book a 4.5 stars if possible. If you enjoy logic and love God, this is a great book for you.
Some of the chapters are quite quick pases and Poythress can often repeat himself at times explaining transcendence and immanence (I understand he does this because this book is meant to be able to be read from any section or chapter). The questions of reflection at the end of every chapter are wonderfully thought provoking and often challenged me to think through open ended idea questions as well as practice certain elements of logical deduction learned in the chapter.
I would give this book a 4.5 stars if possible. If you enjoy logic and love God, this is a great book for you.
February 12, 2025
This is a strange way to go about saying 3 basic things:
1) creation reveals God's character
2) language is analogical
3) Aristotle is sus
This book was incredibly frustrating. Why spend so much energy just to say that deductive reasoning is difficult?
The second half of the book is altogether different. The editors should have prevented the chaos of so many different purposes to compete for our attention. Is this is a textbook on logic or a philosophy book? Not really either one. It certainly isn't any help in evaluating Aristotle from a Christian perspective. At least, not much help.
His appeal to circularity as inevitable I used to accept, but after reading Aristotle and Romans again, I now reject. Accepting Circular reasoning as inevitable is a denial of innate knowledge through induction (sensory experience/God's gift). This is not deduced or scientific knowledge, as Aristotle states, but it is nonetheless true knowledge, which is exactly what Romans says. Thus, all deductive reasoning is founded upon induction, which is different than saying it is founded on assumed premises, such as is true in circular deductive reasoning.
The basic premises underlying deductive reasoning are (1) truly known and (2) not assumed
1) creation reveals God's character
2) language is analogical
3) Aristotle is sus
This book was incredibly frustrating. Why spend so much energy just to say that deductive reasoning is difficult?
The second half of the book is altogether different. The editors should have prevented the chaos of so many different purposes to compete for our attention. Is this is a textbook on logic or a philosophy book? Not really either one. It certainly isn't any help in evaluating Aristotle from a Christian perspective. At least, not much help.
His appeal to circularity as inevitable I used to accept, but after reading Aristotle and Romans again, I now reject. Accepting Circular reasoning as inevitable is a denial of innate knowledge through induction (sensory experience/God's gift). This is not deduced or scientific knowledge, as Aristotle states, but it is nonetheless true knowledge, which is exactly what Romans says. Thus, all deductive reasoning is founded upon induction, which is different than saying it is founded on assumed premises, such as is true in circular deductive reasoning.
The basic premises underlying deductive reasoning are (1) truly known and (2) not assumed
Want to read
March 21, 2018Doug Wilson blurbs it.
December 15, 2024
This was really engaging. Kind of a split between a beginner's logic textbook and a philosophy of logic, with a bent towards the latter. I would probably give it 5 stars if I was an all-out Van Tillian like Poythress, but I will say that his assumptions caused me to question and wonder too much about epistemology rather than focusing on logic. I really dig his commitment to ground logic in the Trinity - it's clearly evident in the Scriptures. But I'm just not so sure about the claim that all of our knowledge is analogical. Nevertheless, I've been wrestling over this age-old debate (analogy and univocity) and I'm thankful for Poythress' perspective immensely, in both logic methods and epistemology. 1st time read. 4/5.
July 7, 2014
This was a great, but long book (700ish pages) on Logic. Dr. Poythress attempts to not only explain and teach formal logic in all it's variations from Boolean logic to computational logic but he also grounds it in biblical presuppositions.
For example he will teach the Barbara syllogistic form
All A's are B's
All B's are C's
Therefore all C's are A's
Then he will give an example of where to find that form of Logic in the gospels.
He also goes onto teach very complex issues of logic like Godel's Incompleteness theorems.
This book is a text book, and at the end of every chapter you will find reflection questions to help grasp each chapters contents. This book builds and by the end, if you do the work, it will challenge you.
But even a cursory reading is beneficial, maybe not grasping every form of logic, but understanding it enough to have a firm understanding of the conclusions.
For example he will teach the Barbara syllogistic form
All A's are B's
All B's are C's
Therefore all C's are A's
Then he will give an example of where to find that form of Logic in the gospels.
He also goes onto teach very complex issues of logic like Godel's Incompleteness theorems.
This book is a text book, and at the end of every chapter you will find reflection questions to help grasp each chapters contents. This book builds and by the end, if you do the work, it will challenge you.
But even a cursory reading is beneficial, maybe not grasping every form of logic, but understanding it enough to have a firm understanding of the conclusions.
October 24, 2013
Much like asking someone what philosophy is, asking someone what logic is in a conversation will no doubt draw blank stares of confusion and bewilderment. To many people logic is the stuff mathematicians and philosophers discuss with no relevance for the man-on-the-street. Very much like philosophy, this could not be further from the truth. Logic pervades our everyday lives through our thought processes and accompanying speech. Contrary to much of secular and naturalistic understanding, logic does not exist independent of the world on its own but is rather, as Vern Poythress argues, rooted in the nature and character of God.
With the view in mind to present a Christian view of logic Vern Poythress has written Logic: A God-Centered Approach to the Foundation of Western Thought. The book is written in two parts. The first art address Christian foundations for understanding logic and the second part is an introduction to logic itself. There is a sense in which this is two books in one. Peppered throughout the second part are introductory chapters in which Poythress returns again to the argument of the first section in order to establish a God-centered understanding of the various logical ideas. So, Poythress explores the theistic foundations of logical functions, quantification, computation and the like.
A Christian Perspective
While Logic can be used as an introductory course book on logic, Poythress has written the book from an unapologetically Christian perspective. We can either view logic autonomously or as Christians. Since we are to hold every thought captive to Christ then we have to ask ourselves if “allegiance to Christ actually makes a difference in logic?” (40) Poythress argues it does. To go a step further, Poythress, not surprisingly, defends the Christian nature of logic from a presuppositionalist perspective. We all have pre-commitments about our view of the world and the Christian has specific presuppositions regarding God and His word. A Christian is to view logic through these presuppositions. We are to submit our thoughts and our thoughts about logic to the knowledge of Jesus Christ.
Trinitarian Foundations
If logic does not exist on its own in neutrality then what form the foundations for its existence? The triune God. First, Poythress argues that logic is reveals the character of God (chap. 7). Logic is consistent, dependable, universal in their application to all people everywhere for all time and its laws possess a mystery to them. The characteristics of logic can only work when we begin with the character of God. Second, logic is personal rather than impersonal (chap. 8). Logic is inherently rational and rationality is an attribute of persons. “In practice all human beings believe that logic expresses rationality. This rationality in logic is accessible to human beings. But, as we know, rationality belongs to persons, not to rocks, trees, and subpersonal creatures. If the logic is rational, which we assume it is, then it is personal.” (68) In turn, logic functions and is expressed through language. “Laws of logic are clearly like human utterance in their ability to be grammatically articulated, paraphrased, translated, and illustrated. Language, like rationality, belongs to persons. It follows that logic is in essence personal.” (68-69) He states further, “They are in fact personal; they are the expression of the language of God and the self-consistency of God, which is in harmony with the personal love of the Father for the Son and the Son for the Father, through the Holy Spirit.” (173) Third, logic is rooted in the trinitarian nature of God as Father, Son and Spirit. Logic is inherently linguistic and language comes from God as the original speaker. Poythress writes, “Within God’s original divine speaking, the meaning of his speech has a correlation with the plan of God the Father; the ‘grammar’ has a correlation with the Word; and the speech has specific for through the Holy Spirit as the divine breath.” (76) For those who are still unconvinced, Poythress points to how the unity and diversity of God undergirds logic.
"God is one. He has a unified plan for the world. The universality of logic reflects this unity. God is also three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This diversity in the being of God is then reflected in the diversity in the created world. The many instances to which logic applies express this diversity. Moreover, unity and diversity are expressed anther way. The unity of God’s plan has a close relation to the Father, the first person of the Trinity, who is the origin of the plan. The Son, in becoming incarnate, expresses the particularity of manifestation in time and space…Thus he is analogous in his incarnation to the fact that one universal logic expresses itself in particular instances." (87)
When all is said, logic depends on God. When we examine the characteristics of logic, such as rationality and language, we must conclude that it is grounded in God who is the source of those. If it were separate from God then it would be in competition with God and possibly over God. This is not a Christian way to think of logic.
A Fallen View of Logic
If logic is necessarily dependent upon God then how do people not recognize this and seek to develop Godless views of logic? True to his theological commitments, Poythress points to the far reaching effects of the Fall on the thoughts of man. It is a matter of the heart’s disposition towards God Himself. Scripture teaches us that man is in open rebellion against God (Ps. 2; Rom. 1). In sin mankind suppresses the truth of God because his heart is darkened. Man substitutes the creator with creation. “This process of substitution takes place in the case of logic as well as in other areas. We engage in substituting an impersonal conception of logic for the reality of its personal character. This substitution is a form of idolatry.” (81) Because logic reveals to us about God man suppresses this truth in an effort to remove God from the picture. Man can know true things about logic, such as its rules, but it does so despite rejecting its only possible foundation and source – God Himself. The thoughts of the unregenerate mind on logic need to be redeemed. As the subtitle of the book indicates, we need an uprooting of the Western view of logic that has pervaded our history.
"If our thinking about reasoning needs redeeming, we are not going to be able confidently to use reasoning in the way it has often been understood in the Western tradition. We must have a more reliable foundation. God himself is that foundation. We come to know God through Christ. God instructs about his ways in the Bible. By loving him and absorbing his instruction, we have hope of coming to a sound understanding of reasoning and logic." (37)
In short, what man suppresses in a God-centered view of logic is His display of “his eternity, omnipotence, omnipresence, immutability, transcendence, immanence, and truthfulness in the laws of logic.” (517)
Conclusion
There is much more that can be said from Poythress about the relationship between God and logic. One of the shinning chapters of the book is 24 in which Poythress examines the traditional five theistic proofs for the existence of God. Even here, Poythress argues, one pre-commitments concerning the existence of God play a role in their ability to convince the unregenerate mind that is darkened by their heart of sin and rebellion towards God.
In typical Poythress fashion the chapters are short and most of them are easy to handle. Even with a topic like logic, Poythress does a masterful job of explaining its trinitarian foundations and the many forms in which logic manifests itself. Poythress is Biblical and consistent in his approach to the subject.
As a standard textbook on logic this book is like many others. As a book on logic that is self-consciously writing from a Christian perspective this book provides the Christian with the theological, philosophical, epistemological and ontological foundations for logic that are submissive the lordship of Jesus Christ in all things to the glory of God. Not all Christians will be convinced of Poythress’ argument but it needs to be given serious consideration.
NOTE: I received this book for free from Crossway in exchange for an honest review. I was under no obligation to provide a favorable review and the thoughts and words expressed are my own.
With the view in mind to present a Christian view of logic Vern Poythress has written Logic: A God-Centered Approach to the Foundation of Western Thought. The book is written in two parts. The first art address Christian foundations for understanding logic and the second part is an introduction to logic itself. There is a sense in which this is two books in one. Peppered throughout the second part are introductory chapters in which Poythress returns again to the argument of the first section in order to establish a God-centered understanding of the various logical ideas. So, Poythress explores the theistic foundations of logical functions, quantification, computation and the like.
A Christian Perspective
While Logic can be used as an introductory course book on logic, Poythress has written the book from an unapologetically Christian perspective. We can either view logic autonomously or as Christians. Since we are to hold every thought captive to Christ then we have to ask ourselves if “allegiance to Christ actually makes a difference in logic?” (40) Poythress argues it does. To go a step further, Poythress, not surprisingly, defends the Christian nature of logic from a presuppositionalist perspective. We all have pre-commitments about our view of the world and the Christian has specific presuppositions regarding God and His word. A Christian is to view logic through these presuppositions. We are to submit our thoughts and our thoughts about logic to the knowledge of Jesus Christ.
Trinitarian Foundations
If logic does not exist on its own in neutrality then what form the foundations for its existence? The triune God. First, Poythress argues that logic is reveals the character of God (chap. 7). Logic is consistent, dependable, universal in their application to all people everywhere for all time and its laws possess a mystery to them. The characteristics of logic can only work when we begin with the character of God. Second, logic is personal rather than impersonal (chap. 8). Logic is inherently rational and rationality is an attribute of persons. “In practice all human beings believe that logic expresses rationality. This rationality in logic is accessible to human beings. But, as we know, rationality belongs to persons, not to rocks, trees, and subpersonal creatures. If the logic is rational, which we assume it is, then it is personal.” (68) In turn, logic functions and is expressed through language. “Laws of logic are clearly like human utterance in their ability to be grammatically articulated, paraphrased, translated, and illustrated. Language, like rationality, belongs to persons. It follows that logic is in essence personal.” (68-69) He states further, “They are in fact personal; they are the expression of the language of God and the self-consistency of God, which is in harmony with the personal love of the Father for the Son and the Son for the Father, through the Holy Spirit.” (173) Third, logic is rooted in the trinitarian nature of God as Father, Son and Spirit. Logic is inherently linguistic and language comes from God as the original speaker. Poythress writes, “Within God’s original divine speaking, the meaning of his speech has a correlation with the plan of God the Father; the ‘grammar’ has a correlation with the Word; and the speech has specific for through the Holy Spirit as the divine breath.” (76) For those who are still unconvinced, Poythress points to how the unity and diversity of God undergirds logic.
"God is one. He has a unified plan for the world. The universality of logic reflects this unity. God is also three persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. This diversity in the being of God is then reflected in the diversity in the created world. The many instances to which logic applies express this diversity. Moreover, unity and diversity are expressed anther way. The unity of God’s plan has a close relation to the Father, the first person of the Trinity, who is the origin of the plan. The Son, in becoming incarnate, expresses the particularity of manifestation in time and space…Thus he is analogous in his incarnation to the fact that one universal logic expresses itself in particular instances." (87)
When all is said, logic depends on God. When we examine the characteristics of logic, such as rationality and language, we must conclude that it is grounded in God who is the source of those. If it were separate from God then it would be in competition with God and possibly over God. This is not a Christian way to think of logic.
A Fallen View of Logic
If logic is necessarily dependent upon God then how do people not recognize this and seek to develop Godless views of logic? True to his theological commitments, Poythress points to the far reaching effects of the Fall on the thoughts of man. It is a matter of the heart’s disposition towards God Himself. Scripture teaches us that man is in open rebellion against God (Ps. 2; Rom. 1). In sin mankind suppresses the truth of God because his heart is darkened. Man substitutes the creator with creation. “This process of substitution takes place in the case of logic as well as in other areas. We engage in substituting an impersonal conception of logic for the reality of its personal character. This substitution is a form of idolatry.” (81) Because logic reveals to us about God man suppresses this truth in an effort to remove God from the picture. Man can know true things about logic, such as its rules, but it does so despite rejecting its only possible foundation and source – God Himself. The thoughts of the unregenerate mind on logic need to be redeemed. As the subtitle of the book indicates, we need an uprooting of the Western view of logic that has pervaded our history.
"If our thinking about reasoning needs redeeming, we are not going to be able confidently to use reasoning in the way it has often been understood in the Western tradition. We must have a more reliable foundation. God himself is that foundation. We come to know God through Christ. God instructs about his ways in the Bible. By loving him and absorbing his instruction, we have hope of coming to a sound understanding of reasoning and logic." (37)
In short, what man suppresses in a God-centered view of logic is His display of “his eternity, omnipotence, omnipresence, immutability, transcendence, immanence, and truthfulness in the laws of logic.” (517)
Conclusion
There is much more that can be said from Poythress about the relationship between God and logic. One of the shinning chapters of the book is 24 in which Poythress examines the traditional five theistic proofs for the existence of God. Even here, Poythress argues, one pre-commitments concerning the existence of God play a role in their ability to convince the unregenerate mind that is darkened by their heart of sin and rebellion towards God.
In typical Poythress fashion the chapters are short and most of them are easy to handle. Even with a topic like logic, Poythress does a masterful job of explaining its trinitarian foundations and the many forms in which logic manifests itself. Poythress is Biblical and consistent in his approach to the subject.
As a standard textbook on logic this book is like many others. As a book on logic that is self-consciously writing from a Christian perspective this book provides the Christian with the theological, philosophical, epistemological and ontological foundations for logic that are submissive the lordship of Jesus Christ in all things to the glory of God. Not all Christians will be convinced of Poythress’ argument but it needs to be given serious consideration.
NOTE: I received this book for free from Crossway in exchange for an honest review. I was under no obligation to provide a favorable review and the thoughts and words expressed are my own.
March 29, 2024
Vern Poythress attempted to write a textbook on western logic from a Christian perspective. Although he discussed other logics, his main focus was on justifying first order logic with identity (FOL=) as a neo-platonic reflection of “God’s logic” and, because of that, personal and loving.
This reflection bridges the Creator-creature distinction. However, when he sets up this reflection between FOL= and “God’s logic” he assumes that FOL= is not just another example of man’s desire for autonomy from God. This is where he makes a mistake.
To see why this characterization of FOL= is problematic, consider that Poythress would not want to describe the Tower of Babel as a reflection of “God’s tower”. Because the Tower of Babel is an example of man’s desire for autonomy from God, it should not reflect anything from God.
Poythress knows that almost no one, Christian and non-Christian alike, thinks FOL= is personal in any way. To counter this anticipated objection, he accuses those who might reject his argument as being “massively guilty” of “idolatry”. For example, consider this comment about guilt and idolatry on page 84:
"Christians too have become massively guilty by being captive to the idolatry in which logic is regarded as impersonal. Within this captivity we take for granted the benefits and beauties of rationality for which we should be filled with gratitude and praise to God."
By committing to FOL= Poythress blinds himself to seeing it as another attempt by man to gain autonomy from God. Given that commitment, perhaps better described as compromise, he now has to defend FOL= even when it attacks the Trinity.
This reflection bridges the Creator-creature distinction. However, when he sets up this reflection between FOL= and “God’s logic” he assumes that FOL= is not just another example of man’s desire for autonomy from God. This is where he makes a mistake.
To see why this characterization of FOL= is problematic, consider that Poythress would not want to describe the Tower of Babel as a reflection of “God’s tower”. Because the Tower of Babel is an example of man’s desire for autonomy from God, it should not reflect anything from God.
Poythress knows that almost no one, Christian and non-Christian alike, thinks FOL= is personal in any way. To counter this anticipated objection, he accuses those who might reject his argument as being “massively guilty” of “idolatry”. For example, consider this comment about guilt and idolatry on page 84:
"Christians too have become massively guilty by being captive to the idolatry in which logic is regarded as impersonal. Within this captivity we take for granted the benefits and beauties of rationality for which we should be filled with gratitude and praise to God."
By committing to FOL= Poythress blinds himself to seeing it as another attempt by man to gain autonomy from God. Given that commitment, perhaps better described as compromise, he now has to defend FOL= even when it attacks the Trinity.
May 6, 2019
Read most of the chapters in this book for my logic class. It was well written. Maybe some day I'll read the whole book.
Read
December 3, 2022Extremely dense. Had to read it very slowly. Poythress is a genius though
April 25, 2014
How do you review a book on logic? I took logic courses while getting my B.A. in philosophy in college and tutored in the same subject during that time. Despite my knowledge of the subject (and love for it), I still wondered: How do you review a book on logic? After receiving this book from Crossway to reviews nearly a year ago (sorry, Crossway- I'm the worst!), I have asked myself that repeatedly. There are a number of things that make a review of Logic difficult.
1. This book is a magisterial work. It contains 733 pages of difficult logic teaching, as well as the deepest of "deep theology" both philosophical and Biblical.
2. Logic is a complex subject and many things have to be covered at length to do the subject justice. Logic covers them all. Does it do it well?
3. No one can read Logic in a single sitting. Even to read it in less than two or more months would be, it seems to me, a waste of time. This is a subject that takes a long time to learn. Truly, symbolic logic (SL hereafter) is a language in an of itself. There are new terms, new symbols, new ways of thinking. To learn it takes practice, discipline, and a certain amount of intellect.
With that said, I feel comfortable saying that Poythress's book is not for everyone. Simply stated, Logic is not the book for the average churchgoer. For someone seeking to learn a great deal more about not just what to think (though they will get that), but also how to think, Logic is perfect.
How should this book be used is the real question. It's not for everyone, clearly.
Not only that, however, I would say that this book is not necessarily even for those seeking to learn the basics of practical logic. Keep in mind that Poythress's goal was not merely to have written a logic textbook; rather, he sought to write a philosophical approach to thought itself that is God-centered and done through logic. Poythress believes that secular logicians do not give accurate answers to the questions of the importance of logic and it's relation to human life, neither do they give satisfactory limits or uses of logic (on the whole, that is. Of course they offer good uses in general). Poythress says (25): "We need a new approach to the subject--we need a distinctively Christian approach... Many would say no. They would say that logic is what it is, irrespective of religious belief. I think that the reality is more complicated. There is a Christian view of logic."
What follows thereafter is a discussion accessible enough to those willing to plumb the conversation's depths with their full attention, but also a discussion distinguished enough to challenge many academicians and logicians. Poythress not only teaches the basics of informal and formal logic (syllogisms, truth tables, symbolization, etc.), he also give the theistic foundations each, which can be an especially helpful motivator to logic students everywhere. No doubt, many a logician has despaired in their studies at one point or another (this junk is hard!). These sections, however, are both brilliant and Biblical and ought to be great motivators to those trying to study to the glory of God.
Part I.B. "God in Logic" ought to be required reading for all who would study God's place in the academy. Poythress's discussion on Boolean Algebra (II.B.35) and Propositional Logic (II.C) are especially helpful. His discussion of Philosophy and Logic (IV.F) also ought to be required reading for those interested in Christian philosophy. Perhaps the shortcoming of this book is its lack of exercises. Though there are though-provoking and challenging questions at the end of each section, there are very few exercises. It is exercising one's logical skills (particularly in SL) that makes a logician. In this regard, the book suffers a tad, and I would recommend supplementary texts, such as Elements of Deductive Inference or something of the sort to those who wish to use this book in teaching. For what it is--a Christian view of logic--this book is exceptional. For Christians in the field of philosophy and logic, this text ought to be celebrated, devoured, and regularly consulted. I would recommend it to all who are up to the task.
1. This book is a magisterial work. It contains 733 pages of difficult logic teaching, as well as the deepest of "deep theology" both philosophical and Biblical.
2. Logic is a complex subject and many things have to be covered at length to do the subject justice. Logic covers them all. Does it do it well?
3. No one can read Logic in a single sitting. Even to read it in less than two or more months would be, it seems to me, a waste of time. This is a subject that takes a long time to learn. Truly, symbolic logic (SL hereafter) is a language in an of itself. There are new terms, new symbols, new ways of thinking. To learn it takes practice, discipline, and a certain amount of intellect.
With that said, I feel comfortable saying that Poythress's book is not for everyone. Simply stated, Logic is not the book for the average churchgoer. For someone seeking to learn a great deal more about not just what to think (though they will get that), but also how to think, Logic is perfect.
How should this book be used is the real question. It's not for everyone, clearly.
Not only that, however, I would say that this book is not necessarily even for those seeking to learn the basics of practical logic. Keep in mind that Poythress's goal was not merely to have written a logic textbook; rather, he sought to write a philosophical approach to thought itself that is God-centered and done through logic. Poythress believes that secular logicians do not give accurate answers to the questions of the importance of logic and it's relation to human life, neither do they give satisfactory limits or uses of logic (on the whole, that is. Of course they offer good uses in general). Poythress says (25): "We need a new approach to the subject--we need a distinctively Christian approach... Many would say no. They would say that logic is what it is, irrespective of religious belief. I think that the reality is more complicated. There is a Christian view of logic."
What follows thereafter is a discussion accessible enough to those willing to plumb the conversation's depths with their full attention, but also a discussion distinguished enough to challenge many academicians and logicians. Poythress not only teaches the basics of informal and formal logic (syllogisms, truth tables, symbolization, etc.), he also give the theistic foundations each, which can be an especially helpful motivator to logic students everywhere. No doubt, many a logician has despaired in their studies at one point or another (this junk is hard!). These sections, however, are both brilliant and Biblical and ought to be great motivators to those trying to study to the glory of God.
Part I.B. "God in Logic" ought to be required reading for all who would study God's place in the academy. Poythress's discussion on Boolean Algebra (II.B.35) and Propositional Logic (II.C) are especially helpful. His discussion of Philosophy and Logic (IV.F) also ought to be required reading for those interested in Christian philosophy. Perhaps the shortcoming of this book is its lack of exercises. Though there are though-provoking and challenging questions at the end of each section, there are very few exercises. It is exercising one's logical skills (particularly in SL) that makes a logician. In this regard, the book suffers a tad, and I would recommend supplementary texts, such as Elements of Deductive Inference or something of the sort to those who wish to use this book in teaching. For what it is--a Christian view of logic--this book is exceptional. For Christians in the field of philosophy and logic, this text ought to be celebrated, devoured, and regularly consulted. I would recommend it to all who are up to the task.
February 29, 2020
Once this book got past basic Aristotelian syllogisms it went 100% over my head, so I’m not sure if I’m really the best one to write a review for this book. Regardless, this book was pretty fascinating as Poythress is likely one of the only people in the world who could write something like this. He has a Ph.d in math from Harvard and one in theology as well, so he is drawing on dual areas of expertise simultaneously throughout. He offers some really convincing, or at the very least thought-provoking, arguments for why the laws of logic/mathematics are actually grounded in the triune God.
This is a very difficult read that is neither an introduction to logic or theology, as it requires at least a basic knowledge of both before one begins reading the book. Regardless, it’s interesting and is worth reading for those interested in how God relates to the philosophy of math/logic.
This is a very difficult read that is neither an introduction to logic or theology, as it requires at least a basic knowledge of both before one begins reading the book. Regardless, it’s interesting and is worth reading for those interested in how God relates to the philosophy of math/logic.
May 28, 2014
Poythress' tome manages to be flawed yet essential at the same time. As a logic textbook, this would be entirely unworkable, even as a college text, despite the fact that exercises or review questions are dutifully appended to each chapter. As a work of philosophical theology, the format is often very odd with a profusion of short chapters. Nevertheless, this is the finest presuppositional thinking about logic, philosophy and even computation that we are likely to see in a long time, and it appropriately finishes in glorious doxology. An Amazon reviewer called this a "hyper-Calvinist Godel, Escher, Bach," I think meaning it as an insult. And while Poythress doesn't necessarily have the literary charm of Hofstadter, the comparison is apt in the scope, depth and beauty of both works.
May 29, 2013
see my blog for my review: http://philosopherdhaines.blogspot.ca...
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews