Good and necessary consequence: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 06:30, 19 November 2009

The phrase good and necessary consequence was used more commonly several centuries ago to express the idea which we would place today under the general heading of logic; that is, to reason validly by logical deduction or better, deductive reasoning.

Even more particularly, it would be understood in terms of term logic, also known as traditional logic, or as many today would also consider it to be part of formal logic, which deals with the form (or logical form) of arguments as to which are valid or invalid.

In this context, we may better understand the word "good" in the phrase "good and necessary consequence" more technically as intending a "valid argument form".

One of the best recoqnised articulations of the authoritative use of good and necessary consequence to make deductions from Scripture can be readily found in probably the most famous of Protestant Confessions of faith, the Westminster Confession of Faith (1646), Chapter 1, sec. 6, as well as in many others, including the Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession, and the London Baptist Confession (1677/1689).

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-The phrase '''good and necessary consequence''' was used more commonly several centuries ago to express the idea which we would place today under the general heading of [[logic]]; that is, to reason validly by logical [[deduction]] or [[deductive reasoning]].
+The phrase '''good and necessary consequence''' was used more commonly several centuries ago to express the idea which we would place today under the general heading of [[logic]]; that is, to reason validly by logical deduction or better, [[deductive reasoning]].
-Even more particularly, it would be understood in terms of [[term logic]], also known as '''traditional logic''', or as many today would also consider it to be part of [[Argument form|logical form]], which deals with the ''form'' (or [[logical form]]) of arguments as to which are [[valid]] or invalid.
+Even more particularly, it would be understood in terms of [[term logic]], also known as traditional logic, or as many today would also consider it to be part of formal logic, which deals with the ''form'' (or [[Argument form|logical form]]) of arguments as to which are [[Validity|valid]] or invalid.
 In this context, we may better understand the word "good" in the phrase "good and necessary consequence" more technically as intending a "valid argument form".