VI. Argument
6.2 Logic
Article 184 - Logic
There are three (3) forms of valid Logic based on the approach to time and the chronology of events as well as the number of inputs (Propositions) and options of Conclusion being Bivalent Linear, Multivalent Linear and Multivalent Multilinear:
(i) Bivalent Linear Logic is based on the presumption of single chronological set of dependent time events and only one (1) of two (2) possible outcomes or Conclusions; and
(ii) Multivalent Linear Logic is based on the presumption of a single chronological set of dependent time events and two (2) or more possible outcomes or Conclusions; and
(iii) Multivalent Multilinear Logic is based on the presumption of a multiple set of interdependent time events and two (2) or more possible outcomes or Conclusions.
Only Multivalent Multilinear Logic is capable to approximating to any degree of accuracy the reality of Divine Law, Natural Law or Cognitive Law. Both Multivalent Linear Logic and Bivalent Linear Logic are wholly unable to accurately portray the reason, function and effect of any real world events with any degree of accuracy.
While Bivalent Linear Logic is the most unnatural system for portraying, recreating or analyzing the reason, cause and effect of any real world events, it is the most functional of all three (3) logic models in terms of law because of its simplicity. Therefore, Bivalent Linear Logic is the foundation of all Positive Law or law derived from Positive Law.
As Bivalent Linear Logic is the most unnatural system for portraying, recreating or analyzing the reason, cause and effect of any real world events, it cannot be used in Law to describe Cognitive Law, Natural Law or Divine Law. Furthermore, Bivalent Linear Logic can only be applied to fictitious persons, not to actual men or women.
Bivalent Linear Logic is based on three (3) laws of reason being Identity, Non-Contradiction and Bivalency being:
(i) The Law of Identity states than an object is the same as its identity; and
(ii) The Law of Non-Contradiction or the "exclusion of paradox" states that a valid proposition cannot state something that is and that is not in the same respect and at the same time; and
(iii) The Law of Bivalency (Excluded Middle) states that conclusions will resolve themselves to one (1) of two (2) states being valid or invalid.