# The Nature of Reasoning in Theology, Philosophy, and Mathematics

## TL;DR

This paper argues that reasoning about ultimate knowledge in theology, philosophy, and mathematics is fundamentally either foundational or circularly justified, supported by comparisons and analogies across these disciplines.

## Contribution

It introduces a unified epistemological framework for understanding reasoning about ultimate knowledge across theology, philosophy, and mathematics.

## Key findings

- Reasoning about ultimate knowledge is either foundational or circularly justified.
- Discussions include comparisons and analogies from mathematics.
- The framework clarifies the nature of rational support in these disciplines.

## Abstract

This article supports the epistemological claim that sound human reasoning about ultimate knowledge is either foundational or circularly justified. In particular, questions which naturally arise in theology, philosophy, and related disciplines, to the extent that they rationally treat ultimate knowledge, are necessarily supported in one of these ways. Comparisons with, contrasts to, and analogies from mathematics are given to illustrate and enhance this central claim.