Another objection to Van Til’s presuppositionalism is that it is covertly pragmatic. Far from making any headway toward demonstrating that Christianity is objectively true, Van Til has really only proven that Christianity represents a most, or even the most useful and desirable belief system. Yet, again, the objector has lapsed back into the very sort of position that Van Til has proven untenable. If reality were the sort of place where subjective and objective truth could be so disconnected, the objector would have no ground for supposing that his reasoning process advances by objectively valid inferences.413 Hence, the objection that Van Til’s proof is merely pragmatic, rather than both useful and true is itself incoherent, until and unless the objector can prove that reality is, or even could be, marked by such a dichotomy.

Bosserman, B. A.. The Trinity and the Vindication of Christian Paradox: An Interpretation and Refinement of the Theological Apologetic of Cornelius Van Til (pp. 105-106). Pickwick Publications, an Imprint of Wipf and Stock Publishers. Kindle Edition.

Imagine for a moment that someone objects that laws of logic are merely a part of your conceptual scheme with no relevance to the way reality is. Reality(whatever that is) is absurd. How could the idea that the distinction between our conceptual scheme and reality be meaningful? Wouldn’t the distinction imply itself that reality is such that the distinction is possible? Wouldn’t reality have to be logical in order for this distinction to be not merely conceptual?

Christianity in the eyes of a presuppositionalism was never a conceptual scheme in the first place. It is a worldview. A mix of ethical, metaphysical, epistemological, etc kinds of beliefs. It doesn’t merely organize our experience but gives meaning to what it means to have an experience in the first place.