Lean verification registry · Authored proofs · The Logos Architecture
Written formal sequents verified
Axiom-free: true · 2 checked theorem statements.
Lean establishes the listed formal statements and dependencies. The exact authored source, Ground, known premise meanings, application validation and empirical evidence remain separately typed. No unencoded section is certified by a neighboring theorem.
Original source author: Maclain Hunter. Machine formalization: Replit Agent. No original wording was rewritten.
Source registered: 2026-10-02T20:00:09.316Z (not original authorship).
Formalized: 2026-10-03T10:37:05.082Z.
Checked: 2026-10-03T10:37:22.537Z.
Independent timestamp: 2026-10-03T10:42:55.000Z.
Authored source SHA-256: c1bd02f277276f609a52d278980594cac39994f3d7612ba46201e231c1eff7b3
Lean source · Verification JSON · Exact archived source JSON · Compiler report · Current authored source page · Signed release and verification instructions
Lean (version 4.7.0, commit v4.7.0, Release) exitCode=0 'HunterAuthored.inference_1' does not depend on any axioms 'HunterAuthored.source_identity_rule' does not depend on any axioms
{P, P <-> Q, Q <-> R, R <-> P} |= R -> (P & Q)
Exact source sequent under finite two-valued propositional semantics. Source proposition meanings and Logic/Logos/God Ground are preserved separately; this checks the inference, not unencoded prose.
Law of Identity
The explicitly named Identity rule, over every type and element. The remaining prose is not replaced by this witness.
Ancient Myths and Logic by Maclain Hunter
Premises:
P: When it comes to logically analyzing myth, ancient texts, philosophical texts, scripture (sacred texts), allegory, or indeed “any writing” it is crucial, for the reason of maintaining a logically coherent understanding and interpretation, that we avoid falsely equating a strictly logical view and alternatives.
Q: We must accept those texts and allegories as writings that have to logically be unpacked and made to logically represent the Logos and a coherent Logocentric framework - to be logically understood, meaningful, and useful. This is true no matter the specifics of the allegory.
R: Assume the negation of P and Q. This leads to absurdity where logical interpretation might take a back seat to logically ignorant or divorced theories and interpretations of Reality and its internal aspects (ie - everything that exists in Reality).
Logical Reasoning:
{P, P <-> Q, Q <-> R, R <-> P} |= R -> (P & Q)
Conclusion: {P, Q, R}:
Texts must be interpreted logically to be interpreted logically, this is tautological and unpacked and explained with sound logical reasoning and semantics in the premises P, Q, and R above - with certainty. Alternatives have been explored but are, being defined as “alternatives” by a state of Logical Coherence besides “Full Coherence” (Logic) cannot without contradiction be as logical or less contradictory than Full Coherence (Logos) itself.
Even in the case of a text where the author may have meant something in a less logical, the reader can make the text more meaningful and useful by exploring the more coherent interpretation.
An example of this would be how I understand the words “Ehye Asher Ehye” as a display of the Law of Identity regardless of whether the author (whose traditional name or pen name is “Moshe”) understands that, and the implications of the Rational God or True Origin being logically equivalent to the Law of Identity, or not.
A system or perspective that doesn’t value Logic and Logical Coherence (Logic’s Identity and alignment with it) as the Measure of value, meaning, or other concept (ie - any concept) is not somehow coherent logically despite this, or objectively valid by coherent metrics despite this, but rather discredits and undermines itself in the Universal Order (Logos - Logic) by being incoherent with Logical Coherence (Logos - Logic) itself.
Appeals to alternative perspectives or alternatives to acceptance of Logical Coherence, including the act or stance of withholding judgement and waiting to a later time to acknowledge Logical Coherence (and/as the Standard of Logic), which may seem reasonable in a deceptive sort of way, are logically untenable and amount to contradictions akin to having a “reasonable doubt of Reason” or a meaningless and self-defeating “x-like disbelief in the very existence of x” (ie - a rational disbelief in the Logos as the Source of Rationality, also called God).
Truth Table Analysis:
PQR⎪P P↔Q Q↔R R↔P╞R→(P&Q)
TTT⎪T TTT TTT TTT TT TTT
TTF⎪T TTT TFF FFT FT TTT
TFT⎪T TFF FFT TTT TF TFF
TFF⎪T TFF FTF FFT FT TFF
FTT⎪F FFT TTT TFF TF FFT
FTF⎪F FFT TFF FTF FT FFT
FFT⎪F FTF FFT TFF TF FFF
FFF⎪F FTF FTF FTF FT FFF
Q.E.D.