To the athiests: Why should we default to the axioms of logic?

[1048576]

Causality, like any other religious belief, is inherently unfalsifiable. Thus it can only be taken as a hypothesis. Why take it as the null hypothesis? The only thing I can think of is that logic can predict more events in more detail than any current religious scripture, but this seems like a silly reason. If someone wrote a book detailing every detail of my past, present, and future existence, I wouldn't accept it as truth before it was observed to be false. Yet I've always been told to just accept logic. Is it so I won't become paranoid because none of the scriptures can tell me whether or not my floor will turn into lava in five minutes?

Sorry for rambling block of text.

 

[nakedsnake]

This probably should go into the debate hall ask for a invite

 

[riboflavinbob]

Causality, like any other religious belief, is inherently unfalsifiable. Thus it can only be taken as a hypothesis. Why take it as the null hypothesis? The only thing I can think of is that logic can predict more events in more detail than any current religious scripture, but this seems like a silly reason. If someone wrote a book detailing every detail of my past, present, and future existence, I wouldn't accept it as truth before it was observed to be false. Yet I've always been told to just accept logic. Is it so I won't become paranoid because none of the scriptures can tell me whether or not my floor will turn into lava in five minutes?

Sorry for rambling block of text.

You don't have to accept logic just because you're told to (though this is usually called "ignorance")

 

[Matt]

rawr no serious discussions allowed!

(take it to the debate hall, bub)