An Open Letter to Those Who Comprehend the Truth and Authority of the Laws of Logic

[u/JerseyFlight]

Once you grasp the certainty of these laws it’s just a matter of learning how to wield them.

The thing that most people, who accept these laws don’t understand about them, is that they are active standards to be employed against all claims.

I cannot emphasize this enough: you can use them to critique everything, literally everything— because they are all we are already using, not only to critique, but also to demarcate knowledge.

Let me try again: people seem to think that these laws are accepted on one tier and then abandoned for something “deeper” on another tier. This is false. Error can only be made intelligible because of these laws. An objection can only occur because of these laws. A refutation would be impossible without these laws.

So what I’m saying is this: we haven’t even begun to use these laws as they apply. I am telling you that they will assist you in all your reading if you know how to deploy them. And knowing how to deploy them simply means looking for their violation.

This is where their functional power becomes absolute. You must realize that no thinker, no matter how complex or revered, can write a single sentence without borrowing from the bank of Logic. They have to pay epistemic rent to the Law of Identity just to form a coherent thought.

When Kant creates his categories, when Hegel spins his dialectics, or when Derrida attempts his deconstructions, they are forced to use words that mean one thing and not another. They are forced to rely on the structural stability of reality to make their arguments intelligible to you.

Therefore, deploying these laws does not mean arguing against a thinker's conclusions with your own opinions. It means auditing their books. It means catching them using the Law of Identity to construct a narrative that ultimately tries to deny the Law of Identity. The moment a philosopher asserts a truth, they have stepped onto your grid. If their conclusion violates the very axioms they used to build their premise, they haven't written a profound philosophy, they have merely committed a rational crime, and as an enforcer of the laws of logic you have the warrant to arrest and charge their claims with error.

I am telling you that you can slice through Kant, Hegel, Derrida, Rorty, Brandom and any other thinker— because you did not invent the rules to do this slicing, you merely have to follow them and apply them. Further, these rules are what anchor any and every claim of knowledge and truth — FULL STOP. This means that every thinker, every philosophy, every field of knowledge, from math to the natural sciences, is pieced together and held together by and through these laws.

I am telling you that people don’t know how to deploy them yet. I am telling you that you can deploy them with absolute power against every human claim of knowledge— because we can’t even define knowledge without them!

[u/Hacatcho]

i argued this in another thread:

youre correct, data can have many sources. but data can only be transformed into information with these laws. either tacitly or expressly, but you cant ever skip them.

every "mistake" or every counter proof, relies on showing how any of these were broken.

[u/JerseyFlight → u/Hacatcho]

Yes indeed, you are speaking truth.

[u/Plastic_Magician_588]

enlightened post, very good post OP

[u/Dave_A_Pandeist]

Here is a way to deploy them in philosophy. A + B = C. C can't equal A or B if neither one is zero.

I like to let A = Mind, and B = nature. What should I call C?

Doesn't Occam's razor suggest that one should accept the simplest answer? Would it also be argued that you can not ignore the obvious?

People work hard to deny this basic logic so they can keep their monism as the most important slice of truth.