you’re confusing tools with laws. we invent the word hammer but we don't invent the laws of logic that allow a hammer to function. if logic were just a brand or a social agreement, reality would change every time we changed our minds.
by choosing utility over justification, you’ve admitted you don't care about what is true
if logic is just a human invention, then A=A was false before humans existed. did a tree have no identity until a caveman grunted it into existence?
is 2+2 = 4 universally true? if so, logic is universal
what I am saying is the law of identity is true no matter your language or personal opinion and you couldn't even form an argument against the law of identity without assuming the law of identity. so since we have established logic is true and universal, what is it grounded in?
if you don't believe me, read Aristotle’s Metaphysics, Book IV. he pointed out that anyone trying to deny the universality of laws of logic is essentially reduced to a vegetable, because they've annihilated the possibility of meaning anything at all.
https://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/metaphysics.4.iv.htmlLogic is a man made (conceptual) tool not a law same way a hammer is also a tool (physical) not a law.
How does logic allow the hamer to function exactly? Logic is a man-made concept the hammer cannot be affected by immaterial concepts. Only physical force can affect the hammer such as you taking the hammer in your hand and swinging it. The hammer doesn't need justification for its existence it already exists. You can give it a name, you can even decide how to use the hammer or if certain people are allowed to use hammers but you cannot make a hammer appear out of thin air by putting an identity on it. You can only make the hammer physically out of existing materials.
In maths logic might appear to be universal since its mostly binary or controlled isolated variables but when you try to apply it to some complex human problem with million variables it doesn't really work. Especially when tradeoffs/compromises are involved.
2+2 =4 isnt universal it is just an commonly agreed term to maintain consistency within certain systems, but it is not an absolute law of the physical universe or all mathematical frameworks. Like language certain words are given meaning but the words themselves can be changed if the collective decides to update its lexicon. If tomorrow we decided 2+2=5 then that will be new logic not because it's some universal law. These are just tools that we can update and change any time just like designing a new and more ergonomic hammer.
I'll stick to God's truth, but thanks for your opinion.
Maths ain't mathing still believes bible anyway.
Thanks for confirming its a cult.
This post was edited by addone on Apr 13 2026 06:21pm