Do You Mind?

In our last post, we began exploring a big question: Why does logic work so consistently? We see order all around us—gravity always pulls things down, 2 + 2 always equals 4, and pressing the brake pedal always slows the car (thankfully!). But where does this order come from? What ensures its reliability, day in and day out?

Some argue that logic is just a product of the natural world. It emerged, they say, through random processes over time—like a stream carving a path through rock. But does this explanation really hold up? Randomness doesn’t produce the kind of unchanging consistency we see in logic. A stream might carve a path, but it doesn’t create the laws of physics that determine its flow. Something deeper must already be in place.

Let’s take a closer look at this idea. Imagine building a house. The foundation needs to be stable, solid, and unchanging. If the ground beneath your house shifts and crumbles, the whole structure collapses. Logic is like that foundation—it doesn’t work if it’s unstable or prone to change. For logic to function as it does, it must be rooted in something firm, something timeless.

And here’s where things get tricky for materialistic explanations. The physical world is always changing. Stars burn out, mountains erode, and even atoms eventually decay. If logic came solely from the material universe, how could it remain constant while everything else shifts? Wouldn’t it evolve or break down like everything else in nature?

Let’s go even further. Logic isn’t something we can measure with a ruler or see under a microscope. It is immaterial—it doesn’t take up space or have physical properties. Yet it’s real, and it governs everything. How does something non-physical emerge from a purely physical universe? The more we think about it, the more naturalistic explanations seem to hit a wall.

So, what’s left? If logic doesn’t come from the physical world, it must come from beyond it. Could there be a source outside of time, space, and matter—something immaterial, unchanging, and consistent? Could there be a foundation for logic that isn’t subject to the flaws and fragility of the universe?

This brings us to an important question: Is it possible that the reliability of logic points to a mind behind it all? A mind that isn’t bound by time or matter—a mind that ensures the universe makes sense?

And think about this: Logic is something we engage with using our own minds. It’s the tool we rely on to reason, process, and make sense of the world. Doesn’t it make sense that a mind—not randomness or mere physical processes—would be the source of something so deeply tied to how we think? After all, just as a computer’s code reflects the mind of its programmer, logic itself seems to reflect the structure and consistency of a mind far greater than our own.

We’re not drawing conclusions yet, but it’s worth asking: Could logic itself be a clue, pointing us toward something—or someone—bigger?

Let’s explore that idea further in the next post. Stay tuned! (next entry ->)