PhilArchive
open access
Is There A Logic of the Ineffable? Or, How Is it Possible to Talk About the Unsayable?
This chapter defends a single, fixed, definite answer to the question: Is there a logic that governs the unsayable? The proposed answer is: “Yes, and no. Or yes-but-not-yes. And/or yes-no.” Each component of this answer is examined and used to generate three laws of what I call “synthetic logic”, which correspond directly to the laws of classical (Aristotelian) logic: the law of contradiction (“A=-A”), the law of non-identity (“A≠A”), and the law of the included middle (“-(Av-A)”). We can talk about the unsayable only by assuming that propositions constructed in accordance with these three alternative logical laws can be meaningful.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Fatalism and the Metaphysics of Contingency#733928
- From Causal Production to Structural Constraint: Explanatory Roles, Emergence, and Ontological Stability#167207
- The Preservation Necessity. Definitive Version.#691140
- The Absurdity of Infinity and The Beginning of The Universe#730534
- Causation and the Grounds of Freedom#776982
Record · ID 758785
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive