{
  "author": "Maclain Hunter",
  "title": "Good Faith and Logical Argumentation",
  "identifier": "hunter-good-faith-logical-argumentation",
  "sourceKind": "authored-foundational-record",
  "content": "Alex Gopoian: \n\nWhat do you think is more important?\nLogical argumentation or effective good faith?\n\nMaclain Hunter: \n\nP: Logical arguments are necessary to know Objective Truth (Adonai). \n\nQ: Good Faith (intellectual honesty) is necessary to know Objective Truth (Adonai). \n\nR: Assume we can know Truth (God) by ~P & ~Q. This leads to contradiction. \n\n{P, P <-> Q, R, R -> Q, Q} |= (P & Q) & R\n\nvalid\n    ↓  ↓  ↓  ↓  ↓      ↓  \nPQR⎪P P↔Q R R→Q Q╞(P&Q)&R\n――――――――――――――――――――――――――\nTTT⎪T TTT T TTT T  TTT TT\nTTF⎪T TTT F FTT T  TTT FF\nTFT⎪T TFF T TFF F  TFF FT\nTFF⎪T TFF F FTF F  TFF FF\nFTT⎪F FFT T TTT T  FFT FT\nFTF⎪F FFT F FTT T  FFT FF\nFFT⎪F FTF T TFF F  FFF FT\nFFF⎪F FTF F FTF F  FFF FF\n\nNote based on the context the proof was written in: \n\nAssume someone asked the question of what was more important between logical arguments and good faith (or acting in good faith or having any reasonable form of good faith). \n\nThat would be setting up a false dichotomy that would miss the point of the proof above which implies in its formal reasoning that the coherent answer is to transcend the false equivalence of such a question and see the coherent path and the ultimate form of both acting in good faith and making logical arguments to be “making good faith logical argument that are effective and of high fidelity” and that which is coherent with such a thing as an intellectually honest logical proof or good faith argument. Coherence and what is part of it (or coherent with it) is not something that can always be taken and understood piecemeal. \n\nQED",
  "formal": null,
  "structuredAuthoredProof": null,
  "authoredSteps": null,
  "recordedAt": "2026-10-03T01:36:11.633Z",
  "originalAuthoredAt": null,
  "propositionMeaningBoundary": "Atomic identifiers retain their meanings in the exact source. No arbitrary truth assignment establishes an ontological or empirical premise; the formal witness checks the written inference."
}