On Logic and Alternate Universes

[Edwardo Piet]

I would say nothing at all should violate logical absolutes.

Nothing can.

We should never be too confident about the law of identity or other logical laws/absolutes holding unconditionally in every single form of reality there may be. That would be folly.

It would be silly to not be absolutely confident about something absolute.

You can't define a reality where it doesn't apply, that's the whole point.

To be clear, I'm not saying at all we should not always rely on logic in order to arrive at all truths we can arrive at, or that we should entertain the use of some "illogic" to determine truths about this reality we're in.

There may be other forms of logic that are illogical to us and so we call them "illogic" but such "illogic" still has to conform to A=A. Everything does.

All definitions and all tautologies must conform to A=A.

But at the same time, let's not absolutely assert that every aspect/form of this reality must absolutely unconditionally conform to logic.

Absolutely everything has to conform to the logical absolutes.

It would be nonsense, of course, if it did not conform absolutely to logic, but you just never know.

Total nonsense that violates A=A cannot exist. You can't have something that isn't something. You can't have A that doesn't=A. A that isn't A or something that isn't something is nothing.