|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 12, 2022 17:26:02 GMT
The law of excluded middle applied to the law of identity and the law of non-contradiction, either the law of identity is true or the law of non-contradiction is true. Either way one of the laws negate through this self-referentiality. Because of the "or" function of excluded middle a decision must be made between the two laws (identity and non-contradiction) however before the decision is made both laws are simultaneously true and false until the potential of one existing is actualized, this is the contradiction.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 14, 2022 4:46:51 GMT
Three laws of logic are the same one law:
1. A=A
2. ~(A&~A)
3. Av~A
A=A :: A→A&A→A :: A→A
~(A&~A) :: A→A
Av~A :: ~(A&~A) :: A→A
All three laws is the same A→A law.
|
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 18, 2022 21:46:39 GMT
Three laws of logic are the same one law: 1. A=A 2. ~(A&~A) 3. Av~A A=A :: A→A&A→A :: A→A ~(A&~A) :: A→A Av~A :: ~(A&~A) :: A→A All three laws is the same A→A law. But the laws are actually or potentially cancelled when excluded middle is applied to the law of identity and the law of non-contradiction; either the law of identity exists or the law of non-contradiction. Considering "or" requires a choice beforehand both the law of identity and the law of non-contradiction are simultaneously true and false, thus contradictory, before the decision is made. Because of the self-application of excluded middle to the other two laws the laws are subject to choice. In other words choice determines identity. |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 18, 2022 21:48:37 GMT
Three laws of logic are the same one law: 1. A=A 2. ~(A&~A) 3. Av~A A=A :: A→A&A→A :: A→A ~(A&~A) :: A→A Av~A :: ~(A&~A) :: A→A All three laws is the same A→A law. But the laws are actually or potentially cancelled when excluded middle is applied to the law of identity and the law of non-contradiction; either the law of identity exists or the law of non-contradiction. Considering "or" requires a choice beforehand both the law of identity and the law of non-contradiction are simultaneously true and false, thus contradictory, before the decision is made. Because of the self-application of excluded middle to the other two laws the laws are subject to choice. In other words choice determines identity. According to what I've desribed, there is no difference between the laws. So what about that the excluded middle? It has the same form as the 2nd, so do the 1st. All the laws of logic is one law. |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 18, 2022 21:57:57 GMT
But the laws are actually or potentially cancelled when excluded middle is applied to the law of identity and the law of non-contradiction; either the law of identity exists or the law of non-contradiction. Considering "or" requires a choice beforehand both the law of identity and the law of non-contradiction are simultaneously true and false, thus contradictory, before the decision is made. Because of the self-application of excluded middle to the other two laws the laws are subject to choice. In other words choice determines identity. According to what I've desribed, there is no difference between the laws. So what about that the excluded middle? It has the same form as the 2nd, so do the 1st. All the laws of logic is one law. The law of identity is equivocation, the law of identity is the absence of equivocation. As such both are opposites. |
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on May 18, 2022 22:00:40 GMT
According to what I've desribed, there is no difference between the laws. So what about that the excluded middle? It has the same form as the 2nd, so do the 1st. All the laws of logic is one law. The law of identity is equivocation, the law of identity is the absence of equivocation. As such both are opposites. All the three laws have that equivocation, but they have them as three laws, that the equivocation exists only as multiple. |
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on May 18, 2022 22:04:10 GMT
The law of identity is equivocation, the law of identity is the absence of equivocation. As such both are opposites. All the three laws have that equivocation, but they have them as three laws, that the equivocation exists only as multiple. "or" is not equivocation and "=/=" (non-contradiction) is not equivocation...both are absences of equivocation. The law of identity is equivocation, the law of non-contradiction is the absence of equivocation. |
|
