The Law of Non-Contradiction

As you cleverly noticed from the title, the topic today will be The Law of Non-Contradiction. The Law of Non-Contradiction states that it is not possible that something be both true and not true (at the same time and in the same context). In other words, if there are two contradictory statements regarding the same thing, one of them is false. For example if I was to say to you, “I would love to go to dinner with you next week”, and then take a breath and say ”I would hate to go to dinner with you next week.” These are two diametrically opposed statements. The initial reaction of your common sense tells you that something is a bit off with what I just said. Your brain is telling you that one of them is false.

Your response to these two statements would be one of confusion, and rightly so. Our brains are not wired to make sense of known contradictions. Our logical side kicks in and says that either both statements are false, or only one of the statements is false. Yet, here is the important point that we must remember. They cannot both be true. Combined with our God given ability to reason and what I like to call your “gut” (Intuition, First Reaction, Pre-Conceived Notions, Common Sense) reaction; we determine that things are true. Arriving at the conclusion that something is a truth is based on a combination of our observations, research, and our experiences being tested. So, what are some observable examples of accepted truths that exist in our world today?

• The speed of light is 299,792,458 meters per second
• Murder is wrong.
• The equation that Isaac Newton created for universal gravity is F = GMm/R².
• The primary colors are red, blue and yellow.
• The sun is at the center of our galaxy and we revolve around it.
• All people are created equal.
• The gravitational pull of our moon is what causes ocean tides.
• Aurora Borealis is caused by the interaction between clouds of high energy ion plasma particles and the earth’s magnetic field.

If you were to say that you did not believe in the above statements that would be your prerogative. However, we must realize that our beliefs cannot erase truth. Not agreeing or believing these statements would not alter their accuracy. The law of non contradiction says that if I were to pose opposite conclusions to any of these statements, either my statement is false, or the original statement is false. But they cannot both be true. Can water be wet and not wet? Can light and dark occupy the same space? Is it possible for someone to be chronologically old and young at the same time? Is two plus two five? These are all simple examples of contradictions, but some would have us believe that these are possible with enough self convincing

In today’s society, tolerance is the new creed. Granted that tolerance is a value we should all embrace and is beneficial for relational purposes, to help learn patience, to absorb knowledge about things we are not familiar, and to help us to empathetically put ourselves in others’ shoes. But in our aim to make sure that everything is tolerated and that no one is offended, we have become a society that believes that everything can be true, no matter how contradictory.

Picture this. In a large auditorium, there is a gathering of five hundred of the top academics from all of the country from all different fields of education. They have come to debate how to create a global education network, and the most efficient methods of doing so. The first proposal is to start construction from the local level with pre-schools. While others maintain that if they were to merely alter the current system the objective could be achieved. Yet still other academics say that the best way to do attack this task is to trash the system as it is, and rebuild the whole world’s education system over again. As soon as this idea is proposed, another group says that the best way to create this new network is to have each continent tackle the job independently.

Are all of these conflicting proposals true? Can they all be the best solution even though they are completely contradictory ideas? Is this really possible? Can two or more completely opposite conclusions about the same topic, all be true? Of course not, but we have been told that it is possible and that it is perfectly normal to think that it is so.

Why are we discussing this topic? I feel that it is an extremely important issue. It has become a major issue in society. Let’s take a look at why a breakdown of the concept of contradictions, would lead to disaster. In our world today, we see a slow erosion of the idea that things are either true or false. We are told not to tell our kids they are wrong, but to encourage them to find the right solution on their own. We cannot tell someone that he is morally wrong on a topic, because then we are closed minded and presented as being judgmental.

We tell people that they can pick any religion that they want as long as it suits them, as long as it works for them and as long as it doesn’t affect others. We have migrated as a people from societies of right and wrong to societies of “if it feels right or wrong”. Where is the standard for it? When did it go from a God given standard, to a man given standard? Do we feel that we are absolved of absolute morality and truth merely because we feel that we are? The ramifications of the dissolution of the law of non contradiction would result in a breakdown of physics, mathematics, language, history, justice and law to name only a few fields that would be dramatically affected.

Let’s say for a moment that I do not believe in the law of non contradiction. In my line of thinking, these statements would all be correct because I feel that they are, and no one can tell me that what I feel is wrong because I justify these truths myself. No other justification is needed.

• Gravity does not exist because I cannot see it and therefore do not believe it exists. The laws of physics are fairy tales. It would affect my life if I accepted them as truth. Therefore I choose not to.
• I do not do my taxes because I do not believe that the equations are correct. As a matter of fact, no equations are correct.
• All definitions of words in the English language, or any other language, are up for debate. I do not believe that the word melancholy means pensive, despondent or gloomy. I believe that melancholy means a type of fine china dishware.
• Hitler never existed and he never killed any Jews. Proving this to me will not matter. It does not suit me to believe this, so I reject even the notion.
• All lawyers and judges are useless. Everybody knows that no testimony can be held as truthful. Convictions are pointless as criminals just deny that they ever committed the act. And law has no purpose, because it sets boundaries on me and nothing can do that except me.

Does this sound ludicrous? Do these statements make sense? I can answer with a resounding no. But yet, as the bottom of the mountain of right and wrong gets eroded, these statements must be given credence. It is the next logical step. It is the only possible way to explain them. The way to make these statements become true is to attack the idea that there are only certain things that are true, and certain things that are false. Once you have attacked that, then the law of non contradiction becomes nothing more than another idea that somebody made up one day to try and prove a point.

So what is the point? We as a human race have collectively declared that we observe, feel and conclude that a person can be right or wrong when it comes to statistics, mathematics, architecture, grammar, biology, anatomy, pharmaceuticals, botany, physics, language, and morality.

Why do we assume any different for the things of God?

Truth is not subject to interpretations or feelings. It is not altered by cultural upbringing or by location in the globe. Truth does not need to appease your emotions in order to be true. The contradictions that we have discussed are evidence that someone can be wrong and someone can be right. Often Christians are portrayed as narrow minded or fundamentalist. If narrow minded means that I believe that truth is narrow, then yes I am narrow minded. And if fundamentalist means that I believe that there are certain things that exist in this universe that are true independent of subjective human feelings and their interpretations, then yes I am a fundamentalist.

My closing thought for you would be to think about this concept and to ask yourself, can I be wrong about God?

The average life span of a human is 66.12 years (2008 est). If truth was subject to what we thought about it that would have to mean that we were definers of absolute truth. But, the only truths that we would be able to define would be in the span of our lives. Since we have a life span, it means that our truths end when we do.

We are not absolute. We do not outlive everything. Therefore, if anyone else’s self defined truths should differ from ours, there exists a contradiction. Resolution of contradiction is necessary for truth. It cannot exist without it. Truth is exclusive. I end with a statement of exclusivity by a man named Jesus.

“I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me”