Logical Fallacy of Universal Negative

Whenever a logical fallacy is committed, the fallacy has its roots in Agrippa's trilemma. All human thought (without Divine revelation) is based on one of three unhappy possibilities. These three possibilities are infinite regression, circular reasoning, or axiomatic thinking. This is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Some have claimed that only logic and math can be known; however, that is not true. Without Divine revelation, neither logic nor math can be known. Science is limited only to pragmatic thinking because of the weakness of human reasoning, which is known as Agrippa's trilemma. Universal negative, a form of axiomatic thinking, is one of these three unhappy possibilities.

The fallacy of universal negative occurs when an assertion is made that something does not exist. The reason that it is a fallacy is that one would have to be all-knowing or receive divine revelation to make such an assertion. And, indeed, divine revelation would be an exception to the logical fallacy of universal negative.

Since this fallacy strikes at the core of the Atheist belief system, it is worth spending a few moments discussing it.

When dealing with an Atheist, who believes absolutely that God does not exist, the Atheist will use the logical fallacy of tu quoque (you too) to defend his/her position even though that doesn't solve the problem of the universal negative fallacy at all. In other words, they will say, “You don’t believe in unicorns or fairies do you? For the same reason, I don’t believe in God.” This argument also commits all these fallacies: straw man, false analogy, and equivocation. It sneakily changes the order of the words—there is a big difference between saying, “I don’t believe that something exists,” as opposed to saying, “I believe that something does NOT exist.” And, indeed, many Atheists, having realized this problem, are switching to saying, “Atheists don’t say that we believe that God does not exist; we say that we don’t have belief in God.” Now, even Atheist Dawkins seems to be intimidated and has switched to saying that he is agnostic about God. That doesn’t make his heart any softer toward God, of course.

Some Atheists still contend that certain things that are known to be false are not irrational to disbelieve: like the Easter Bunny, Santa Clause, fairies or God, so they claim that "the Universal Negative is not always a fallacy." However, if something is false, then there are ways to show that it is false without being irrational as in the case of using a universal negative. For instance, Santa Clause, as we know the concept, is supposed to come every Christmas. We soon find out that it is Mom and Dad who put the presents under the tree and not Santa Clause. With God, it is the exact opposite. Everyone who follows Christ is led by Christ and experiences the Christ. So, there is positive evidence for Christ. Of course, as with all evidence, this evidence only does any good if it is examined. If someone refuses to look at the evidence (Have you ever noticed how Atheists don't want to look?) they cannot be influenced by evidence. Anyone can taste and see that the Lord is Good. All they have to do is seek Him sincerely, diligently, patiently, respectfully, and submissively. Everyone who keeps seeking Him will find Him. He’s not a theory or a theology or a concept. He is a Person Who promises to reveal Himself to anyone who seeks Him. And one time reading through "Without Excuse," by Werner Gitt, lets us know that the absence of the God of the Bible is a scientific impossibility.

Some Atheists argue, “To assume that something is true unless it is proven false is a logical fallacy.” That is not the issue.* The proof of Christ is His Presence and His leading. The proof of the Creator God is the creation, and God reveals to us that the creation is adequate proof and every person is responsible and without excuse. They try to fool Christ-followers into believing that they are making sense. However, anyone who follows Christ is led by Christ. Christ is active in their life. So Christ proves Himself to them in the same way a natural father proves himself to his child.

*Note that it is also a fallacy to focus on proving a point that is not at issue in order to make a conclusion about what is at issue. The issue is that Atheists are claiming to know that there is no God without offering any proof.

Examples of the Fallacy of Universal Negative

Naturalism, materialism, uniformitarianism are all good examples of the universal negative.

Naturalism claims that God and the spiritual realm doesn't exist. Materialism does the same. Uniformitarianism claims that the worldwide Genesis flood didn't occur.

One of the mind tricks that some people play with science is to say that they don't deal with truth but only with probabilities. This trick has its roots in the Münchhausen Trilemma. In the Secular Humanist worldview, there are only three possible foundations for thought. None of them are valid, so it impossible to know anything. Therefore, they are not looking for truth, just probability. The problem is that the same foundations for thought that keep them from knowing absolute truth also keep them from knowing probabilities. The must inject arbitrary assumptions, infinite regression, or circular reasoning, so their probabilities are worthless.

“God does not exist.”

This is an example of the Logical Fallacy of the universal negative.

“It is silly to believe in God.”

This is an example of the Logical Fallacy of the universal negative.

“The Genesis flood never happened.”

This is an example of the Logical Fallacy of the universal negative.

“God didn’t create everything.”

This is an example of the Logical Fallacy of the universal negative.