Matt Dilahunty On The Logical Absolutes

[Edwardo Piet]

More transcription by me:

I raise the point in the explanation because I have some minor concerns that there are people who, failing to recognize the truth of this and the value of this, may set themselves up for mistakes. I don't know for sure but that's my quick take on the logical absolutes. There's a lot more to the subject;--there's no way a short video is going to encompass everything about the laws of thought--but hopefully between the different descriptions and the Venn Diagram people will realize that these are merely self-evident basic logical truths that we then use as the foundation. So that when somebody asks us "Well, how do you know what you know?" or "How do you know that this is true?" or "How do you know that 1+1= 2?" it's because everything reduces to this simple diagram, the foundation of set theory, which we know is absolutely true.

The other day I mentioned some people who were trying to multiple possibilities: that something becomes possible if it's possible that it's possible. That just doesn't work. But if you begin with truths that's how you can affirm other truths. It is the foundation on which we can construct logical syllogisms and propositional logic and determine their validity and soundness.

My emphasis. Pay particular attention to my bold.

It's not a constructed system it's the foundation of it. A thing would be a thing whether we were around to define it or call it a "thing" or not. A=A whether we're around to call it "A=A" or not. So, those who say it's purely conceptual are making a use/mention error.