Logic-esque: Fossils (Proposition/predicates, paws to signify artists further entry

[kavaris]

So the full title says: Fossils, Proposition/predicates, and paw prints - which looks like a fossil - and may extend into other shaped fossils - which are the little insignia/embems (our artistic spin) and are representative of an element, or idea, having been further investigated, such that no rational mind can travel on the same logical reasoning or inclination (i will explain this further...)

Now, it would start out in logic (all the logic and reasoning, see wikipedia on "logic") propositions/predicates and such, but it would first identify structure vs unstructure (or some word to act as an antonym to structure) suffice to say, it begins w/ Universal Instantiation—that which also ties in to modus ponens — or the opposite modens tollens — as well as the laws of boolean algebra; BUT for ease of mind, you can begin thinking of this forked proposition as the law of the excluded middle, which says that, for every proposition, either **this proposition**, or **its negation is true**. So that is all to say that, there is a system that marks those points which are well structured, well formed words that a human would use. Those fossil paw prints are like little hieroglyphics in the process of marking a persons thoughts—think of it as being somewhere between pictographs and cuneiform—still carrying the impression of the artists device, wherein, to elaborate further means, 'to communicate beyond the following': logic, reasoning, words, any known letters or languages, forms entirely, visual impressions entirely, etc.... whether its in conversation, a formal writing, or just a journal entry. This implies that, you are treating that fossil as such, and are prepared to communicate beyond the aforementioned forms (and the entirety of sensual information if need be...)

In conclusion, it is not purely "logic", but a more general form of... there is likely already a missing word to encapsulate what this is, and if you think of it, feel free to share.

p.s. i may have missed some things. If anyone wants to further add, or come up w/ more interesting parts, feel free to add to this, otherwise, we can either discuss it, or start using it. We would need a way to communicate the fossil symbol.

Edited June 5 by kavaris

[kavaris]

 see also; 

https://www.britannica.com/topic/logic/Logical-systems

.. which is a good alternative definition, w/ different links to different areas/concepts

.. or things like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_logic#Metaphysics_of_logic

which would jump u to Metaphysics of logic... but theres others on there too, for instance, "Fundamental concepts" defines things like truth, arg, conclusions, and fallacies (note: i might even add to that, the idea of "definitions" versus "intentionally vague & poignant" is also a concept, that which is probably definatory—iuno what the strategic thing is) that all fall under this Philosophy of Logic

Edited June 5 by kavaris

[kavaris]

Heres a proposition yous can pre-suppose/declare:
"All cases of infinity are paradoxical".

NOTE:
Predicates: Properties or relations applied to objects (sometimes called 'conditions')(e.g., "is paradoxical")
Subjects/Objects: The entities the predicates describe (e.g., "cases of infinity")
Continuing on, ask yourselves then, are there ever situations where we can see an infinite amount of things going forward, that does not also share a space very close with an inevitable paradox regardless? Like, is there anything that can be both limitless and non-paradoxical, or, are they almost always synonymous - in every case?
But suppose the answer ended up more complicated (which... it might not, but who knows, right?..) then, we would go further on to use some form logic-esque.

🐾 P || ~P ;
"For any proposition P, either P — OR its negation is true..."(and "nothing else" - insinuated by semicolon) and is to make clearer a deliniation of those specifics, thereby solving some dilemmas that may often plague the mind (and perhaps diverging from traditional styles of communication, if it comes to it) Anyway, that was just an explanation/example, an artists rendering of one possible direction... That doesnt imply that an equation comes first, that was just circumstantial in my argument (and as you can see, it can be like "the prompt" of your 1st sentence, but, it can also appear like a "citation mark" within a sentence, or any number of other things—it is not limited to anything really right now. Maybe later we will encounter limitations for the fossils uses, though because it transcends logic since thats what it itself is to mean, it shouldnt have limitations

Edited June 5 by kavaris