@@someonenotnoone it is not wrong, that in epistemology/science the axiom of identity and its corollaries (i.e. non-contradiction) are indeed used "as logic". The laws of logic are simply the corollaries of identity applied to/by reason, i.e. since the laws of logic can only identify reality, if and only reality itself obeys to that, on which these rules of inference depend on, namely the axiom of identity. It should be noted that there is an essential difference between the logical law of identity (which can be completely expressed by A=A) and the metaphysical AXIOM of Identity. Since it is an axiom, it can only be self-evident, but it cannot be analysed (i.e. correctly broken down). A=A in this context is just a symbolic expression and does not contain the full meaning of the identity axiom. The axiom of identity (more broader) states: That "to *be*, is to be *something*", or Existence is (instead of has) Identity. This "something" is called the nature, i.e. "to be is to be nature". And, secondly, where the A=A is really derived from, this something/nature is a sort of monocausal relation (a oneway ticket sotospeak): To be, is to be someting, and only this-one(non-contradictory)-something. This is ment by the axiom of identity
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
11:32
45:28
Are there people for who this isn't "obvious" I'm unsure if I'm supposed to be "learning" or just listening to others explain reality.
You and me both brother. That's the same for me. I think it's just us though
The law of identity "A is "A was a rule for doing logic, for not re-using labels. Not this bullshit about the nature of things.
but this is the axiom of identity. the self-evident truth that anything is what it is and cannot be other. A cannot be B while A is not B.
@@neonschaf "anything is what it is " No, this is logic, it's "things are what you say they are."
@@someonenotnoone it is not wrong, that in epistemology/science the axiom of identity and its corollaries (i.e. non-contradiction) are indeed used "as logic". The laws of logic are simply the corollaries of identity applied to/by reason, i.e. since the laws of logic can only identify reality, if and only reality itself obeys to that, on which these rules of inference depend on, namely the axiom of identity.
It should be noted that there is an essential difference between the logical law of identity (which can be completely expressed by A=A) and the metaphysical AXIOM of Identity. Since it is an axiom, it can only be self-evident, but it cannot be analysed (i.e. correctly broken down). A=A in this context is just a symbolic expression and does not contain the full meaning of the identity axiom. The axiom of identity (more broader) states: That "to *be*, is to be *something*", or Existence is (instead of has) Identity. This "something" is called the nature, i.e. "to be is to be nature". And, secondly, where the A=A is really derived from, this something/nature is a sort of monocausal relation (a oneway ticket sotospeak): To be, is to be someting, and only this-one(non-contradictory)-something.
This is ment by the axiom of identity