Secular Logic By Anthony Fejfar, B.A., J.D. M.B.A. Phd., Esq.

, Coif Member, United States Supreme Court Bar Imprimautur by Coif Perpetual (C)Copyright and (P)Patent by Anthony Fejfar and Anthony Blackstone and Neothomism, P.C. (PA) and The American People and The People of God and The People Greek Logic starts with the definition of Logic and builds a logic system from there. For Greek Logic, that which is illogical is defined as that which is not illogical. That which is illogical is defined as that which does not involve a logical contradiction, such as, attempting to assert that A and not A can exist at the same time and the same place, or, attempting to assert that an Apple and no Apple can exist at and in the same time and in the same place, such as, a persons left hand, for example. Either you have an Apple in your left hand, or you do not. Medeival Logic, on the other hand, always starts with some Biblical or Theological concept, and then works from there. The Logic System of Theistic Logic starts with the assumption that the God of Logic Exists. Every logical proof or problem or exercise always starts with the assumption that the God of Logic Exists. This form of logic is consistent with the Medeival definition of Theology, which is, Faith Seeking Understanding. You see, the Theistic Medeival Logic System starts with the assumption or faith that the God of Logic Exists. On the other hand, the Greek Logic System, which is neothomist, starts with logic itself, and then proves the Existence of God, from that starting point. The Greek Logic System does not involve theology, but instead involves philosophy or jurisprudence and when this system deals with God, it is

Philosophy of God which is involved, not theology. The Theistic Logic System, then, might involve a proof, for example, as stated below: 1. Assume that The God of Logic Exists 2. Assume that Logic is defined as that which is not illogical. 3. Assume that that which is illogical is defined as that which involves a logical contradiction. 4. Assume A and B 5. From A and B, derive A 6. From A and B, derive B

Or, 1. Assume that The God of Logic Exists 2. Assume that Logic is defined as that which is not illogical. 3. Assume that that which is illogical is that which involves a logical contradiction. 4. Assume A or B 5. From A or B, derive A and not B

Of course, if anyone were to object to the assumption of the God of Logic in the Theistic Logic System, we can switch to the Greek Logic System and prove the Existence of the God of Logic with several different proofs for the Existence of the God of Logic, such as: 1. The Proof for God as The Unmoved Mover 2. The Proof for God as the First Cause, Uncaused Cause 3. The Proof for God as Unmoved Movement 4. The Proof for Actual God as Good

And so on, an so forth. Secular Logic, on the other hand, starts with a different set of assumptions for this logic system, which are as follows: 1. Assume that God does not exist. 2. Assume that Satan does not exist. 3. Assume that The Good Exists as a Heuristic Concept. 4. Assume that Evil Exists which is a lessening of The Good or the Opposite of The Good. 5. Assume A and B 6. From A and B derive A 7. From A and B derive B Satanic Logic, on the other hand, is to be distinguished from Secular Logic, and Greek Logic, and Theistic Logic. Satanic Logic starts with the following assumptions: 1. Assume that God does not Exist. 2. Assume that Satan does Exist. 3. Assume that Satan is Evil. 4. Assume that The Good does not Exist. 5. Assume that Evil does Exist. 6. Assume that Evil is irrational. 7. Since Logic is rational and since Satanic Logic is irrational, it is impossible for Satanic Logic to exist since it is illogical or irrational and thus is the opposite of logic and its existence would involve a illogical contradiction.