Abstract

This article focuses on the applications of philosophical logic in the discipline of philosophy of religion of both ‘Eastern’ and ‘Western’ traditions, in which the problem of apparent ontological contradictions can be found. A number of philosophers have proposed using the work of those non-classical logicians who countenance the violation of the law of non-contradiction (LNC) to address this problem. I discuss (1) whether classical or non-classical account of logic is universal in applying to all true theories, and (2) whether there might be extra-logical considerations which affect what is the correct account of logic for the doctrines in question. With regard to Jc Beall’s application of non-classical (FDE) logic to the doctrine of the Incarnation, I argue using the evidence from the writings of church fathers that the meaning of negation found in the core claims of the doctrine of the Incarnation should not be interpreted in accordance with Beall’s FDE account, and that this extra-logical consideration refutes Beall’s project. Moreover, the FDE’s acceptance of the possibility of statements that are both true and false is contrary to what is allowed by the definition of negation in classical logic; therefore (contrary to Beall), Beall is in fact using a different definition of negation compared with the definition used by the classical account. I develop this point in interaction with contemporary philosophy of religion literature and explain its implications and significance for this discipline.

中文翻译：

---

不矛盾律与全球宗教哲学

摘要

本文重点讨论哲学逻辑在“东方”和“西方”传统宗教哲学学科中的应用，其中可以发现明显的本体论矛盾问题。许多哲学家建议利用那些支持违反不矛盾律（LNC）的非经典逻辑学家的工作来解决这个问题。我讨论（1）经典或非经典的逻辑解释是否普遍适用于所有真实的理论，以及（2）是否可能存在逻辑外的考虑因素影响对所讨论的学说的逻辑的正确解释。关于 Jc Beall 将非古典（FDE）逻辑应用于道成肉身教义，我认为，使用教父著作中的证据，道成肉身教义的核心主张中的否定意义不应该存在。可以根据 Beall 的 FDE 帐户进行解释，并且这种超逻辑的考虑反驳了 Beall 的项目。此外，FDE对既真又假的陈述的可能性的接受与经典逻辑中否定的定义所允许的相反；因此（与比尔相反），与经典解释所使用的定义相比，比尔实际上使用了不同的否定定义。我在与当代宗教哲学文献的互动中阐述了这一点，并解释了它对这门学科的影响和意义。