{
  "author": "Maclain Hunter",
  "title": "Truth’s Identity beyond Perception",
  "identifier": "hunter-truth-identity-beyond-perception",
  "sourceKind": "authored-foundational-record",
  "content": "P: Law of Identity: [Truth is Truth tautologically and beyond my perception, my perception is clear when and because I see Truth as Truth in any context or weather.]\n\nQ: Negation of the Contradiction of P: [Assume my Truth is “not Truth” (necessarily), then my Truth is not Truth and my not Truth is liable to be Truth.]\n\nFormal Argument (Proof):\n\n{P <-> Q} |= P <-> Q\n\nConclusion: P <-> Q: \n\nThe Law of Identity is what it is, as Logic is Logic and A is A objectively and universally beyond perceptions of individuals (subjective perspectives that are feasibly incoherent and view A as “not A” through irrational rationalizations), and any contradiction to it is an unlawful contradiction. \n\nWith the (dynamic) “specific premises” written above this means that Truth is Truth and never “not Truth”, and that if my perception ever perceived differently then IT would be off and I would be wrong, not Logic and Truth beyond my perception and as they truly and tautologically are. \n\nTruth Table: \n\nvalid\n    ↓   ↓  \nPQ⎪P↔Q╞P↔Q\n―――――――――――\nTT⎪TTT TTT\nTF⎪TFF TFF\nFT⎪FFT FFT\nFF⎪FTF FTF",
  "formal": null,
  "structuredAuthoredProof": null,
  "authoredSteps": null,
  "recordedAt": "2026-10-03T01:36:26.513Z",
  "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."
}