"these are merely self-evident, basic truths"
Matt Dillahunty swings and misses. This embodies a whole bunch of nonsense about logics. If the logical absolutes are true, they are true within a certain system of logic and a certain meaning of true. That makes them relative to the specific axioms and definitions used and thereby not absolute. What he and Hammy apparently want to state is a point about ontology, that a thing either is or isn't. But logic is not ontology and mixing the two just creates a mess of hidden assumptions. This is reifying classical logic in the extreme.
Matt Dillahunty swings and misses. This embodies a whole bunch of nonsense about logics. If the logical absolutes are true, they are true within a certain system of logic and a certain meaning of true. That makes them relative to the specific axioms and definitions used and thereby not absolute. What he and Hammy apparently want to state is a point about ontology, that a thing either is or isn't. But logic is not ontology and mixing the two just creates a mess of hidden assumptions. This is reifying classical logic in the extreme.