I literally addressed this exact claim of yours in my last paragraph; did you just not read my response or are you choosing to be willfully ignorant? Here's how I explained why your statement is incorrect:
No, because the "laws of logic" are not like legal laws; the laws of logic are dependent on our own definitions of words and meanings. We did not "decide" on what the laws of logic are, the laws of logic are merely properties of language and communication. Think of it like math: we did not "make up" mathematics in the sense that we "decided that 1+1=2", we simply made up numbers as a form of communicating the groups and values of things, and mathematics are merely a property of how these groups/values relate to each other, regardless of what we call them. We made up numbers, but mathematics is simply a function of numbers, just as we made up language and communication, but the laws of logic are simply a function of this. That's why your misunderstanding sounds so ridiculous.
Again, we did not "make up the laws in logic" in the sense that we voted by majority and decided what they will be, we "made up the laws of logic" in the sense that we made up language and meanings and the laws of logic are merely functions of these words and meanings. Again, similarly to math: we did not have some kind of majority vote to "decide" that 1+1=2, we simply made numbers in order to communicate the amounts/values of things, and mathematics is simply an inherent function of how these amounts/values relate to each other. We made up the numbers to communicate, and mathematics is just a function of the numbers, just as we made up words and meanings to communicate, and the laws of logic are just functions of the words /meanings. These functions, like both math and the laws of logic, are universal because the meanings are universal. We made up all kinds of languages to describe the same meanings and ideas in different ways, which is why math or the laws of logic are still the same regardless of what words we made up to explain the meanings we assigned to things.
Again, there is absolutely no god necessary to explain this...it's just how our own communication and meaning functions.
Sii il primo a rispondere a questa commento .