The Laws of Logical Thought

[MetaOntosis]

Those truth tables are pretty fundamental, but here are some more interesting ones.

A "tautology" is whatever is always true, and cannot be false.  It is the contradiction of a self-contradiction.  A self-contradictory statement is the contradiction of a tautology, and so is always false, and cannot be true.  These are true no matter what the truth value of the inputs.  Some familiar examples will follow, with truth tables to demonstrate their being either a tautology, a self-contradiction, or a contingent (maybe true, maybe false, depending upon the input).

One major tautology is the Logical Law of Identity (modified):

   


Notice that it is even sometimes true that (A → ~A), because sometimes A is false, but in our hypothetical we assumed it was true, and so in the process of what is perhaps a conditional proof, we find that after assuming A, we get a contradiction.  Therefore, if the other premises are correct, then the conclusion is that ~A is true.  This can be reversed as well, so that (~A → A), because while A is found true, this implies that the premise, ~A, was false. Note that these are the case only when the the conditional is true because the assumption of the antecedent leads to a contradiction, and so this is an ideal form of that, since the antecedent and consequent are the same statement with reversed truth values.

   

This is a contingently true statement, as sometimes it is not true because the premise is true, and so the conditional is false.  In the case that these two sides of the conditional are the same statement with reversed truth values, then it is one way or the other if the conditional is true, as both cannot be false!  That is a contradiction, just as both cannot be true.  This is just another way of saying the next two Logical Laws.


Here is the Law of Non-Contradiction:

   


As is shown, simply by negating the self-contradictory statement, (A & ~A), we get an always true, tautology. To save room for a different attachment, I'll not show the always false self-contradiction in its own picture, as it can be seen nested as a part of the sentence which is its negation, above.

The third Logical Law of Thought, the exclusive disjunction of any statement into either true, or false, but not both nor neither, is shown here:

   

This is easy to see, because there is no way it could be made false by its very definition. This is the only operation which includes a true statement with its own falsehood, or a false statement with its own contrary truth, in a way that is valid.  Actually, inclusive and disclusive disjunction also do this, but they cannot be the essence since if they both lead to this situation, and yet they have contrary elements, then only what is not contrary between them, where they overlap, can be what essentially leads to this situation, and that overlap is precisely exclusive disjunction, so it should be the statement of this Logical Law of Thought.


Finally, it is of interest to see the relationship between this third Law and the biconditional operation.  Earlier I said they were equivalent, and it turns out this can be demonstrated by means of the biconditional operation.  No more looking through the truth values in truth table, straining the eye to see what is the outer operation of each sentence in order to see if they are equivalent.  Any two sentences, if they are equivalent, are either both true, or both false.  Therefore, this is the negation of exclusive disjunction, just as exclusive disjunction is the negation of biconditional.   Therefore, (A | B) → ~(A <-> B) and ~(A <-> B) → (A | B) are true.  That shows that ~(A <-> B) <-> (A | B) is true.

   

This is the situation in reverse also, as it becomes the case that if one is always false when the other is true, then  its negation is equivalent to the simple statement of the other.  Likewise, if it is reversed in truth value, and made true, then the other side cannot but be reversed also, in order to match in truth value.  That means that one is true, if and only if the other is false.  That is simple the exclusive disjunction!

Therefore this means that exclusive disjunction relates exlusive disjunction to biconditional, but biconditional relates exclusive disjunction to the negation of biconditional, or relates biconditional to the negation of exclusive disjunction, or relates these in a negation which is the reverse of those just stated.  This relationship will become key to some later metaphysical and ethical evaluations of these three Logical Laws in their application to the Logic of the Metaphysics of Moral Antivalence.

[MetaOntosis]

These previously posted truth tables indicate the nature of Laws:  They are always active, always effective, always True.  Their contradiction is not those things, though it may borrow some aspect of their functions, forming a "negative logical space" in the same, or else bordering that same "logical universe".  If truth "always is" then falsehood is an illusion. Yet, illusions occur, so falsehood occurs, and it occurs in the form of a meta-parasite, if you will.  

It is analogous to the manner in which evil first came into existence, as a sort of passive implication of what Originally Is.  It is the "shadow of actuality", a mere possibility, too unworthy of contemplation by Beings to have even been considered, and was not even noticed.  It was eventually registered as a possibility in one mind which was also in a position to act upon it (perhaps that was the only way it could have been noticed, by having just this minimally necessary, maximally impactful stimulus of being the mind in the very nearest possible world to the one in which this idea was first already realizable).  This is the way in which it became substantial, as it was instantiated in thought by the first mind to register it as a possibility. Whatever form this took, it resulted in a scheme to overtake all of existence by covert and insidious means which get all their power as maximally yin force, which has virtually zero power on its own, but can derive power from what with which it comes into contact as a parasite.

The first line of its attack is to be nearly unnoticeable, unthinkable, utterly passive and hidden.  For God is Good and Just, and Wise, and if this evil were detected it would have been destroyed instantly.  It cannot have been noted by Godhead.  It infected a mind which was perfectly disconnected with Godhead in one point, and that point came into contact with this evil idea, and it was a perfectly occult event.

So these forces evolved against Godhead and all Being as a sort of pernicious virus. The deformity which resulted is recognized, contained, identified, studied and destroyed phase by phase, step by step, until the entire phenomenon is annihilated. If this is not the case, then determining what the case is, or even just that this is not the case, is not really an advancement for us, since that means we will have a clearer picture of a horror not worth witnessing, nothing more.

The laws of logic parallel these metaphysical Laws of the Moral Metaphysics, which denounce the idea that in God per se could arise evil, and rather evil is simply "not God", as in "not God Essence".  It is an inversion of that essence, just as falsehood is an inversion of Truth.  And while Truth is ultimately all that is, there is a "form of" truth, statements which are ultimately false, but are true in that they are ultimately false.  They hold truth as a sort of energy source, by denying it application to content which is real, and attaching the affirmation of such truth to contents upon which it does not belong, creating a fraudulent entity of information.  In essence, falsehood does not exist, and hence is completely a negative being, but because it has that much of a vector, by being the inverse of Reality and Truth, it therefore gained momentum by attracting into its antiform a sort of "mirror image" of What Is, and so developed "seeming being" which is maintained by a dislocation of "Real Being"'s energy from its own purposes, and thereby an artificial being is generated, a "false statement" is made, but this process is so dynamically, metaphysically thorough and determined that it is recursively able to deter detection of its evil act.

The later administration over this process of detecting and destroying evil became a science, which is perhaps God's second science and art, which is to realize the nature of evil and destroy it.  God's first science and art were the amplification and increase of Divinity throughout eternity, because God's Being is not static, but active and growing, evolving.  This antivalent duality developed after the First Unity of Divine Reality, before evil was actual.  All statements were True, there was no "not", nor "false".  Not actually.  But potentially, it had always been.  Then it became actual, and the recognition of it had to develop. It was identified as a "lack" in Being, and yet one which had a special property of parasitically taking ontological energy from existing Real  Beings, perverting their polarity against them (in opposition to its origin), and dwelling within that effigy.  It was able to do this so as to appear real, though being simply a "hologram".  It's effects were not a hologram, however, and its form and "matter" are not, nor are its designs and intents, which are formulated by being scavenged from its host victim.

But because it appears "as normal" it is able to infiltrate.  When this was found out and limited, it had to "grow inward", taking energy from its immediate environment until it was sealed off, while learning to "digest itself" (Ouroboros), along with what it had within it and had taken whole, but still had Its own Being (hostage Beings).  How could it be otherwise?

It formed a local, discluded entity, precluded from further expansion, but able to slowly die by destroying all it had acquired. This has an inevitable end, but what is not inevitable is exactly what number, and which Beings can be salvaged/saved from this event. Yet the "logic" of this process follows with consistency the logic of the sort that our conventional human mind produces and uses to operate consistently in this universe.  What is necessary is that antivalence must be understood and brought to its ideal conclusion, which is the separation of Good and evil, so that what is not self-sufficient dies, and that means that evil will die, because it is by definition the denial of, the active mockery of Reality.  Whatever "it" is, it is dependent upon this process to exist, and is wholly committed to its own process, and must be treated by Godhead as "alien", and forever unwelcome.  The disclusive process was invented.

It looks for falsehood, wrong, evil, treating any pair of entities as "at least one, possibly both, are evil".  Because what is REAL and not evil has an independent Essence, aligned forever with Godhead, it will be extracted by this process safely, and instead of NOR, which is (~A & ~B), we find some part of one or the other is salvageable, and we have something like (A & ~B) or (~A & B), but not (A & B).  We're talking essence here, not individual entities which express it.  The "haecceity" of each entity is also sorted in this way as part of a final assessment of its total essence.  That "part" of a composite being here has "free will", and it always earns its way to either Heaven or hell.  But regardless of this outcome, the absolute energy of what is still polarized with Godhead is salvaged "as is", with its own Haecceity, but that which is polarized against is neutralized and transduced into a New Being (evil dies in this way).  Its very "consciousness" is annihilated, but consciousness "as such" is maintained as a pure possibility in the energy which is distilled from that "soul death" of evil, the inversion of what it does to Good and Real Beings in order to survive.

In the end, this results in affirming Divine Essence, and denying (negating) evil.  It couldn't be any other way and make sense but that binary antivalence is the fundamental crux of this process, and so in our thinking it should be the crux also of our logic, or else we will lose the battle against evil on that front within our own individual minds, and that is a sure way to end up corrupted in other ways as well.  One merely need be logical enough in one's analytical thinking to understand the disclusive disjunct between Good and evil, and to understand that the process of their distinction is that their union is directly incompatible with this Truth, and they do not have mutual implications other than in a negated modality where one is destroyed or the other, and this therefore requires that this be hidden from the victim by the victor (from Good by evil) so that its fraud can have a chance of success, and this itself is aided by the fraudulence of denying the Laws of Logical Thought and confusing minds so that they can buy into nonsense which would otherwise have seemed less likely to be valid if only the intuition and instinct of the Being had a logical rather than illogical analytical process to add its voice to the discernment faculties.  One cannot "not" have an analytical mind, but one can have a more or less logically consistent one, especially in certain realms of knowledge.  And this is most pressing in realms of Knowledge:  when ultimate matters are the topic which, when decided, pertain to the ultimate fate of all beings, and in the processing of which Knowledge all Beings have an interest in accuracy and completeness for themselves, but not all have such an interest for others:  some because they are intended victims, some because they seek victory over them.

I challenge every thinking person to actually work their way through the logic I've presented here, which is sufficient for explaining how to determine many matters, whether mundane or metaphysical, and so take responsibility for their own minds, especially their analytical minds, and maximize their chance to do Good rather than evil work in what is, on occult and on manifest levels of existence, a war of minds, of wits, of intelligences.  Test these Laws, develop a familiarity and respect for them, and for logic more generally. Learn it.  There are 19 year-olds who are doing this in college right now, and they often don't even care and just take the course to get the credit!  They get it done on a full schedule involving 4 total courses, completing it with only 25% of their available time, and in just 4 months.  You'd only need to go as far as basic basic proofs, going from predicate logic to quantified, perhaps.  It is worth it.  But if one is too pressed for time, at least a cursory study of my here very basic, and admittedly somewhat amateurish writings in this thread might help fill up some of the gaps.  I think that the ideas expressed are True, and demonstrably so, but in fact even self-evident.  Logic in this way is like the step-by-step accounting of the self-evident.  Sound thinking will be expressible in these and related forms, and will not contradict them.  Sound thinking, like sound ethics and sound money, are already direly in want in this world, so it is up to each person to entrench themselves and fortify themselves with corresponding virtues in their own lifestyles and personal actions.

More on this and other aspects of Logic in the future!

[Elizabeth]

"It is analogous to the manner in which evil first came into existence, as a sort of passive implication of what Originally Is.  It is the "shadow of actuality", a mere possibility, too unworthy of contemplation by Beings to have even been considered, and was not even noticed.  It was eventually registered as a possibility in one mind which was also in a position to act upon it (perhaps that was the only way it could have been noticed, by having just this minimally necessary, maximally impactful stimulus of being the mind in the very nearest possible world to the one in which this idea was first already realizable).  This is the way in which it became substantial, as it was instantiated in thought by the first mind to register it as a possibility. Whatever form this took, it resulted in a scheme to overtake all of existence by covert and insidious means which get all their power as maximally yin force, which has virtually zero power on its own, but can derive power from what with which it comes into contact as a parasite" (MetaOntosis).


Perhaps there was a mistake with one of the creator souls (Franz Erdle discovered they were copied: 2 to the 20th power) to make it even a possibility to manifest the opposite of divine orientation. 


http://psitalent.com/en/universe1.html

[MetaOntosis]

So the logical laws which are primary are expressed with two truth values distributed over one variable, over "one essence", or "one entity".  It demonstrates a bias toward Truth, and toward the existence and factual, actualized reality of the Being which demonstrates these Laws by its ontological behavior through eternity.

When there is a realm of contingency, so that sometimes a being can hold a truth value or its opposite, or when there are modes of such expression which are contributing toward deception and suffering, we see the onset of evil as a manifestation of this entire system of logic over two truth values, so that one truth value is parasitic upon the other.  This is because there are conditions which may "appear so" but in fact are "not" so.  Deception, illusion, fraudulence all spring from this metaphysical possibility, which is what is meant by the division between matter and mind, which is a primary quality of this universe and this was noted long before Plato, but notably by him in recent millenia.

The logical operations which explore the relations between entities over which this binary distribution of truth value reveals that there are modes of their interaction which are primary and absolute, no matter whatever may be contingent, and those are the tautological (always true) and the contradictory (always false).  Those are fitting models for the notion of absolute values per se, so that even insofar as "true" may be mixed with "false" in certain modes, still yet not in these modes, where they are absolutely antivalent.  Therefore while we may say falsehood "has truth value" as the opposite of the statement it denies, when that denial happens to be true, and that truth "has falsehood" in that it may be affirmed of something which turns out to be untrue, in other words even though contingent truth exists, these are nested in a realm which anchors their absolute distinction and separation.  These absolutes, then, stabilize the chaos of their relativity in contingent realms. These absolutes are derived from Original Reality and the utter futility of its negation.

We learned that thinking dynamically requires recognition that sometimes a flow of our thought is erroneous, and needs to be adjusted to either face facts with which it is not properly acquainted, or else reconfigure our thoughts about them in order to properly relate them, and to properly relate them at all events so that a true consequence can be understood to result from this cognitive assessment.  That is a role played by the science of logic when utilized constructively and properly by a thinking mind as a disciplined expression of its own innate abilities.

The motive for doing this in a realm of contingency is to help separate the True from the false, the Truth from falsehood, Truth from lies.  Moreover, this overlaps completely into the issue of ethical considerations, for it involves the combat between those who do not gain advantage from deception with those whose very existence depends upon it and the fraud which they then are better able to put over on other beings (including each other), but especially, in the end and overall, upon those who are Pure and without evil in their natures.  The Great Separation follows laws and methodologies which parallel these modes of thinking and analysis which take place within analytical thought, which are called a form of the "Logos", which is another name for the Spirit of Wisdom which indwells those who are "of Christ".

The psychology of being dynamically able to check our facts, check our thought process, and see whether or not a flaw in thought exists or else whether the flaw is within the realm of observation, is critical to knowing what is going on in a case where truth must be decided from falsehood and in definitive terms.  Likewise, our feelings of Divine Essence which inform our capacities to express Virtues distinguish us from evil beings, and must be intuited properly in relation to the realm in which we find ourselves embodied.  This must be understood to be an antimaterialist frame of ethics, which treats of a world in which deception is likely and systematic as a world in which evil must have sway, and which must be torn down.  First the apocalypse, tearing down the deceptions, then the recompense, each being given its due.

That is Justice, and in logic that is "justification", which is the reasoning provided for making a claim of truth.  It is not arbitrary at all, and it is grounded in Fundamental Facts of Reality, including the Essence which is internal to and eternal as the Minds which generate Reality.  As this proceeds to be demonstrated on this world as on all worlds, there is a separation process whereby evil is separated from Good, and Good is taken back to its Origin, and evil is deconstructed and compressed back into its own origin, which is then forever annulled and sealed from ever existing again.  What a fateful result!  But any other result leads to absurdities in metaphysical and ethical thought, which I attempted to demonstrate in my videos on my Youtube channel, in some of my essays on my blog, and in all sorts of comments or other online participation where I've been involved, either openly or "covertly" under a rather obvious pseudonym.

I think that for part of our Nous to activate and manifest GOD here, for decisive purposes, we must master clarity of function in our bodies and brains, on both sides, and in all manner, for optimal manifestation and mission effectiveness.  Therefore, accurate analysis, accurate intuition, and accurate action, all are variations of the same theme of the integrated manifestation of Spiritual Will.  Persistent will toward completion of these processes, done correctly and with Divine Ends in mind, leads to True Awakening and salvation.  Going against these grains leads to inevitable ruin.

Whatever attempts to prevent this process occurring is the enemy of the Divine Person, and is to be overcome with hostile power, its belligerence crushed under the weight of God's Judgement, now and in part, and at the "Omega Point" and as a whole.  Since the will to perform these deeds, these operations of Being is in fact the will to traverse a teleological space, so therefore "time" is merely the duration of events which must occur to traverse that space.  So therefore "linear" time, "within" embodiments, is simply an illusion except insofar as it secures the proper opportunity to take moral action.  It is better to live a short, and Righteous life than a long and corrupt one.  Those lives (the former) will, taken as a whole, move in a trajectory toward Divine Restoration which is shortest, and that is the True Goal as well.  Hence, physical embodiments here are wrought in, and within circumstances which, make them by their nature a prison of delusion whereby the comfort and longevity of the body are valuable seemingly for their own sake, when in fact that is quite impossible in the Truest sense of the Moral Metaphysics which derails such illusions from fulfillment.

If they are valuable at all, it is only to live out more, and more profound Moral Decisions, which are always going to find resistance from evil beings who offer suffering and a shortening of life in exchange for such Righteous efforts.  Therefore, either one defeats them by some means, or succumbs to their temporary but essentially null victory. Null as it is only a delay in linear time, but not in the temporal dimension which connects these lives through the common thread of a spiritual determinant which angles their energy toward some ultimate and moral result.  Evil beings would offer time-bound longevity and peace within these subdomains of "life existence" in exchange for becoming a morally depraved slave.  Therefore even in this case, longevity and health, 'happiness' and 'peace' in the flesh are not an end in themselves, but a reward for perversion.  It is clear why their being deprived of a Person is the punishment, since that must be the counterpoint which makes the reward seem like an absolute, when in fact it is only a "reward" by relative comparison to another illusion.  That's because to lose Real Existence (which is Moral in nature) for some temporary comfort in a temporary prison, is utterly foolish, just as to fear the loss of comforts, or the worsening of suffering, which is temporary and in a temporary dimension, is foolish compared to losing an eternal and Real Existence, which is far worse!

Ultimately this is demonstration a long range argument between the inevitable victory of ultimate and incontrovertible Truth against the fallacious, insipid and deranged delusions of impossible falsehood.  It is a battle which is inevitable on the whole, but not necessarily in each part.  Each part may have a different result (is contingent), but the whole will definitely have the result of victory for Truth.  The only question is will the individual "in question", when put to the test, choose in favor of that Ultimate Victory in their own case, or not?

If they will, then they will definitely reach the End and receive their Reward from Heaven.  If they will not, then how can they escape the horrible results of a metacontradiction in their own essential selves?

You must choose, but choose wisely.  One path leads to Eternal Life and Glory, the other, to eternal damnation and non-existence.

[millipodium]

Can we trust what anyone says?  Maybe.  Sometimes people lie, sometimes people tell the truth.  

Do others want our actual well being?  Maybe.  Some people may wish us to do "well" but for selfish reasons, like  a slave owner caring for his investment. but someone may love you for you. I guess that's what we all keep hoping for.

Is hope rational?  Maybe. Maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe hope for something better is just hampering our acceptance of a more actual reality.

[millipodium]

I've always liked buddhism for it's "no duh" type of truth.

Ummm.  If you didn't have so many "needs" you wouldnt be so unsatisfied.  Ok.  Tell me more!

[millipodium]

But of course, im no doctrinnaire buddhist.  I  think most religions have some nuggets of wisdom, but are inevitably corrupted by worldly hierarchies. im not a doctrinnaire anything, I pick and choose according to my whims, and with what fits with by preconceived notions.

[Elizabeth]

"The psychology of being dynamically able to check our facts, check our thought process, and see whether or not a flaw in thought exists or else whether the flaw is within the realm of observation, is critical to knowing what is going on in a case where truth must be decided from falsehood and in definitive terms.  Likewise, our feelings of Divine Essence which inform our capacities to express Virtues distinguish us from evil beings, and must be intuited properly in relation to the realm in which we find ourselves embodied. 


 This must be understood to be an antimaterialist  frame of ethics, which treats of a world in which deception is likely and systematic as a world in which evil must have sway, and which must be torn down.  First the apocalypse, tearing down the deceptions, then the recompense, each being given its due" (MetaOntosis).


Studying logic as has been laid down on this user-friendly thread can be helpful. I hope this gets many views because right brained dominant people probably need to exercise these mental muscles.  millipodium, Buddhism seems to employ the use of logic more than any other religion I've known.  

[millipodium]

Yeah. I was very disappointed however when I was watching an interview with the dalai lama and he started spouting the population control/ genocide rhetoric.  A single tear traced its way down my life hardened countenance.

[Elizabeth]

I remember how crushed I was when I found out my guru was a pedophile and dark-arts power player. I never liked the dalai lama or Buddhism - too dry for me. I also could tell the dalai lama was a social-climbing liar. 

I preferred Hinduism but that's another Reptilian inspired one - hell, all religions are. What a tedious, pathethic open-aired prison camp we in.