Griffith’s Reviews > Socratic Logic: A Logic Text Using Socratic Method, Platonic Questions, and Aristotelian Principles > Status Update

Normative laws like “thou shalt not kill” are ideals or principles which can, and have been, disobeyed. However, laws of thoughts which are necessary facts, in which everything (including my and your mind) participates in, that cannot be disobeyed.

The difference between an argument and an explanation made so much sense! The idea that our culture (Western?) has an aversion to anything that claims to be unchangeable, rigid or categorical, like the certainty of a syllogism, which if its premises are true it would be true in all possible worlds, is an interesting observation.

Necessary and contingent truths; tautologies now how to detect arguments.