Just a quick note. This morning I was engaged in a conversation with one of my high school students at the local Christian school regarding a research paper which he presented refuting naturalistic materialism. Interestingly, he has picked up on the transcendental argument for God’s existence (TAG) and what he presented in the paper is wholly correct, namely, that naturalists like to speak about the laws of logic, as if their worldview is rationalistic to the core, but, they cannot account for these same abstract laws. How does one account for a universal, abstract (non-material) and invariant laws such as the laws of logic from a naturalistic perspective? They certainly cannot be accounted for by biology, because what happens in your brain is different from mine, and what takes place in our brains can hardly be referred to as universal law. If one wishes to claim that laws of logic are simply conventions of society, it makes me wonder why other societies have not developed alternate laws of thought. Can you imagine a society which did not adhere to the law of non-contradiction? It would not even be able to function, and we would call them, “irrational,” thus demonstrating that the laws of logic/thought are in reality, universal, abstract and invariant laws…laws which naturalistic materialism cannot account for.