{
  "author": "Maclain Hunter",
  "title": "Logic and Logical Structure as the Source and Standard of Evidence",
  "identifier": "hunter-logic-source-standard-evidence",
  "sourceKind": "authored-foundational-record",
  "content": "P: If Logic and “Logical Structure” were not coherent and integrated/identical then logical contradiction would arise.\n\nQ: Logical Coherence (Logic - Logical Structure) is precisely what makes evidence and/or proof meaningful. Without Logical Structure, empirical evidence wouldn’t even be interpretable. \n\nR: Absent Logic, “logical proofs” existing would be a contradiction (as their Source in Logic would be nonexistent). \n\nS: All proof and evidence - empirical, logical, or otherwise - is inherently tied to Logic and proves Logic is the “Coherent Foundation” of all logical structures including the largest scale Logical Structure (Reality - Existence). The proof this premise is a premise in, even if “invalid” (which could only be the case if Logic/Logos does exist, and if the Logical Standard (Logic) is not absent), proves that Logic (Logos) is extant and real. \n\nFormal Argument (Logical Proof):\n\n{P, Q, R, S} |= (P & Q) & (R & S)\n\nConclusion: \n\nLogic is the Source and Standard of all proof and evidence - the thing that makes proof and evidence meaningful and objective. Absent Logos (the Origin of Reason and Foundation of Logical Existence) there would be no such thing as proof or evidence. Therefore all proof and evidence that exists, even this proof, and even if this proof were somehow “invalid” (which could only be the case if Logos does in fact exist as the Origin of Reality and Evidence), proves the Logos and Logic are the Reality (the Logical Structure of Existence and the Origin of Proof).",
  "formal": null,
  "structuredAuthoredProof": null,
  "authoredSteps": null,
  "recordedAt": "2026-10-03T01:36:33.621Z",
  "originalAuthoredAt": null,
  "propositionMeaningBoundary": "Atomic identifiers retain their meanings in the exact source. No arbitrary truth assignment establishes an ontological or empirical premise; the formal witness checks the written inference."
}