{
  "author": "Maclain Hunter",
  "title": "Logic, Ethics, and Epistemology by Maclain Hunter",
  "identifier": "hunter-logic-ethics-epistemology",
  "sourceKind": "authored-foundational-record",
  "content": "Logic, Ethics, and Epistemology by Maclain Hunter:\n\nPremises:\n\nP: Logic is Logic (a tautology) and, as the self-supporting Foundation of Logical Concepts (the Logos - the Highest Order of Logic - the Natural Order of the Cosmos) encompasses and entails all epistemology and ethics.\n\nQ: To assume otherwise (ie - “~P”) leads to paradox and contradiction where neither epistemology nor ethics are logically coherent and valid concepts (or “logical concepts”).\n\nR: That assumption in premise Q is an absurdity that we must maintain Logic as God and as the Supreme Entity to avoid.\nFormal Argument:\n\n{P, P → Q, Q → R, R} |= P <-> (Q & R)\n\nConclusion: {P, Q, R}: If Logic does not encompass all such notions, and even any concept you can think of, then contradiction arises.\n\nTruth Table Analysis:\n\nvalid\n↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓\nPQR⎪P P→Q Q→R R╞P↔(Q&R)\n――――――――――――――――――――――――\nTTT⎪T TTT TTT T TT TTT\nTTF⎪T TTT TFF F TF TFF\nTFT⎪T TFF FTT T TF FFT\nTFF⎪T TFF FTF F TF FFF\nFTT⎪F FTT TTT T FF TTT\nFTF⎪F FTT TFF F FT TFF\nFFT⎪F FTF FTT T FT FFT\nFFF⎪F FTF FTF F FT FFF\n\nQ.E.D.",
  "formal": null,
  "structuredAuthoredProof": null,
  "authoredSteps": null,
  "recordedAt": "2026-10-02T16:57:39.572Z",
  "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."
}