Philosophy Now Forum

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.

But there isnt one moment before where you make that decision.

You cant prove an axiom, because when you think, you have already take one axiom to create your thinking.

Anyway, the identity principle is tautológic, is just saying that "A is A". That is saying nothing.

To say that "A is A and never no-A" is the no-contradiction principle.

So, there are just the no-contradiction principle.

CHNOPS wrote: ↑Sat May 14, 2022 9:55 pm But there isnt one moment before where you make that decision.

You cant prove an axiom, because when you think, you have already take one axiom to create your thinking.

Anyway, the identity principle is tautológic, is just saying that "A is A". That is saying nothing.

To say that "A is A and never no-A" is the no-contradiction principle.

So, there are just the no-contradiction principle.

The law of excluded middle necessitates a decision as the act of deciding is an axiom; both 'decision' and 'axiom' equivocate.

Both +P and -P share the quality of P. The absence of P results in a hole in the shape of P thus P and -P equate through their common form.