Logical Inquiry Method

The Logical Inquiry Method is a structured questioning technique used in Islamic apologetics to systematically expose logical contradictions, moral inconsistencies, and foundational conflicts within opposing theological or philosophical positions. First proposed by Engku Fauzi, it has been developed as a complementary approach to the Polemical Effectiveness Formula. It provides Muslim apologists with a disciplined framework for engaging in polemical discourse, particularly with Christian missionaries and other ideological opponents. Inspired by classical dialectical reasoning, the Logical Inquiry Method emphasizes critical questioning over assertions, guiding opponents toward self-refutation through carefully constructed lines of inquiry.

Purpose

The Logical Inquiry Method is designed to assist apologists in formulating progressive and targeted questions that reveal inherent weaknesses in opposing arguments. By focusing on eliciting admissions rather than presenting counter-claims, it aligns with traditional principles of rational debate and modern apologetic strategies.

Core principles

The method is governed by six core principles:

• Focused Questioning — Direct inquiries towards exposing contradictions, ethical dilemmas, or irreconcilable beliefs.
• Progressive Structuring — Begin with broad, neutral questions and gradually narrow toward critical points of tension.
• Relational Questioning — Ensure each question depends on the previous answer, preventing evasion and maintaining control of the discourse.
• Lockdown — Use binary questioning to corner opponents into clear admissions, ensuring that every response leads to further inquiry.
• Minimize Direct Assertions — Allow the opponent's own reasoning to highlight flaws.
• Maintain Logical Composure — Ensure consistency and calm rhetoric to enhance pressure without confrontation.

Methodology

The Logical Inquiry Method follows a progressive and relentless questioning cycle, typically structured in three stages:

Stage	Objective	Example
Discovery	Clarify and establish the opponent’s core claim.	"Why is substitutionary atonement necessary for salvation?"
Exposure	Identify logical or moral weaknesses within that claim.	"How does punishing an innocent fulfill true justice?"
Lockdown	Present a dilemma framed as a binary question to force an admission.	"Is it just to punish the innocent—yes or no?"

Relentless Questioning Cycle

In the Logical Inquiry Method, questioning does not cease after a single point is made. Each answer—whether **yes**, **no**, or an attempt to evade—leads directly to the next question:

• If the opponent answers **Yes**, a follow-up exposes the consequences of that admission.
• If the opponent answers **No**, the apologist challenges the inconsistency with their doctrine.
• If the opponent deflects or refuses to answer, this is highlighted as rhetorical evasion, increasing ${\text{RR}}$ within the PEF.

This cycle ensures continuous logical pressure until contradiction, concession, or evasion becomes apparent to the audience.

Example sequence:

• "Is it just to punish the innocent—yes or no?"

1. If Yes: "Then does your concept of justice permit injustice?"
2. If No: "Why does your doctrine require an innocent to suffer?"

Integration with PEF model

The Logical Inquiry Method is designed to work alongside the Polemical Effectiveness Formula (PEF):

$({\text{LP}}\times 0.30)+({\text{MV}}\times 0.30)+({\text{FC}}\times 0.25)+({\text{RR}}\times 0.15)$

where:

• ${\text{LP}}={\text{Logical Pressure}}$
• ${\text{MV}}={\text{Moral Vulnerability}}$
• ${\text{FC}}={\text{Foundational Clash}}$
• ${\text{RR}}={\text{Resistance Response}}$

Each variable is rated on a scale from 1 to 10 based on observed debate dynamics. During discourse, practitioners can assess:

• Increased ${\text{LP}}$ when contradictions are revealed.
• Elevated ${\text{MV}}$ when moral issues are effectively highlighted.
• High ${\text{FC}}$ when foundational differences are made clear.
• Rising ${\text{RR}}$ when opponents evade or deflect.

While the method provides a tactical approach to questioning, PEF offers a quantitative framework to measure the effectiveness of those engagements.

Steps:

1. Apply the Logical Inquiry Method during engagement.
2. Use the PEF model to evaluate argument effectiveness.
3. Analyze outcomes and identify areas for improvement.
4. Refine questioning strategy based on PEF insights.
5. Repeat the process for continuous enhancement of polemical skill.

Example

In a discussion on the concept of inherited sin:

• Discovery: "Can you explain why all humans inherit Adam’s sin?"
• Exposure: "Is it just to hold individuals accountable for actions they did not commit?"
• Lockdown: "Does this align with divine justice—yes or no?"

Regardless of the answer, further questioning continues to expose inconsistencies.

Application

The Logical Inquiry Method is applicable in debates, interfaith dialogues, written polemics, and online engagements. It emphasizes disciplined, rational inquiry consistent with Islamic traditions of debate (adab al-jadal) while addressing contemporary theological challenges.

See also

• Polemical Effectiveness Formula