Abstract This paper defends the syllogism: P1: Nature universally obeys fundamental logic. P2: What universally constrains nature must be supernatural. C1: Therefore, fundamental logic is supernatural. I argue that logic’s inviolability and prescriptive force demand a transcendent foundation beyond the material world. Naturalism, Platonism, and speculative appeals to multiverses fail to ground logic’s causal authority. Theism remains the most coherent explanation. A falsifiability criterion is also proposed to strengthen philosophical rigor. Introduction Every rational endeavor presupposes logic. Without it, coherence collapses, science dissolves, and even doubt becomes impossible. Yet most worldviews either take logic for granted or misidentify its nature. This paper defends a simple but powerful syllogism: fundamental logic is not a byproduct of nature but a supernatural reality that transcends and governs it. I will demonstrate this by: (1) establishing that nature univ...
#apologetics #christianity #worldview 1. The Scope of the Tool Is Narrow Methodological naturalism is the operating assumption of modern science: it limits investigation to natural causes. That’s fine when you're studying combustion engines or bacterial infections. But it’s not a philosophy of truth—it’s a restriction. MN says, “Even if supernatural causes exist, we will act as though they don’t.” That may help in a chemistry lab. It collapses entirely when asking where laws of logic, morality, or the universe itself come from. Using MN to study metaphysics is like using a metal detector to search for love—it simply can’t detect what it refuses to consider. 2. It Silently Smuggles in Metaphysics Naturalistic science pretends to be neutral. It’s not. It assumes that only material causes are valid. But that’s not a scientific conclusion—it’s a metaphysical stance. Ask: What test confirmed that only physical things exist? None. It’s a belief baked into the method, not a discove...