# Q1107 — Predicated Propositions by Maclain Hunter - Q number: Q1107 - Primary URI: https://4p-engine.com/q/Q1107 - Current host route: https://4p-mcb.com/q/Q1107 - Reserved subdomain alias: https://q1107.4p-engine.com/ Hunter develops Coherence, contingent logics and sciences, Universal Logos, God, incoherence, mathematics, and the Logician through seven declared meanings and four anchored proof rotations. Two exact supplied copies differ only in the definition of c: the fuller Logician or Sage/Prophet description and the shorter Logician description. Neither copy is declared primary. > Hunter develops Coherence, contingent logics and sciences, Universal Logos, God, incoherence, mathematics, and the Logician through seven declared meanings and four anchored proof rotations. Two exact supplied copies differ only in the definition of c: the fuller Logician or Sage/Prophet description and the shorter Logician description. Neither copy is declared primary. ## Exact supplied copy — Predicated Propositions, Logician or Sage/Prophet copy Authored by Maclain Hunter. No primary selected. SHA-256: 1fc220556e7ee9cb2acad47b8d76fed95f0130786811ccfc768e7637c5bdd0c1 Source: /proof-knowledge/hunter-predicated-propositions; study: /api/proofs/predicated-propositions/study Predicated Propositions by Maclain Hunter Variable Definition: w == Coherence (defined as: logical alignment; integration within a unifying logical framework; lack of contradiction and conceptual/structural disagreement; ideas that acknowledge the God coherent with Logic; in this context ~(a) signifying “not incoherence”) x == Logics and sciences, plural and contingent (defined as: methods and systems of reasoning; (dynamic or static) finite forms of Order; formal logics and formal systems of reasoning (ie - predicate, modal, propositional, binary, etc.); particular explanations, philosophies, belief systems and proofs that coherently (or in some cases incoherently (and in a flawed way) account for various/all phenomena; empirical science and science based on the traditional scientific method (ie - physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) y == Universal Logic, or “the Logos” in Greek Philosophy, absolute and objective (defined as: the Logic inherent in the Cosmos; the Logical Structure of the Universe; the Framework of Reality; the Natural Order and Way of Reality that all contingencies and contingent logics or reasoning are grounded in, including limitations in limited contexts (that give rise to flawed logics and ideas) and even the irrational doubt (a) of the Logos (y, z) and the Foundation of the Universe (God, w, y, z) found in atheist schools of thought (a)) z == Existence’s Foundation (absolute and universal), also called God (defined as: the Creator, Origin, and Ruler of the Universe; the Moral Authority and Logical Standard; the Supreme Entity; the Ontological and Logical Ground; the Necessary Being and most inherently logical concept that amounts to Coherence (w) and Logic (y) itself) a == Incoherence, encompassing illogic, illusion, and atheistic viewpoints, including principles like falsifiability in the sciences that can’t meet their own arbitrary standards (defined as: misalignment(s) with the Logic of Reality (y), Coherence (w), and the Foundation of the Cosmos (z); expressed as “a is not a” or “{a} |= ~a”; a failure to acknowledge the Universal Logic, Coherence, the Foundation of the Cosmos (God), and their necessary coherence with one another; denial of Reason and that which defies Logic; the contradiction in thinking something must somehow be false to be true, or vice versa, as we find in the arbitrary principle of falsifiability from Karl Popper) b == Number(s) and arithmetic (defined as and encompassing: a quantity or quanta, and quantities or quantum, measurements, as well as mathematical operations/operators, mathematics itself, and the concept of the numerical unit - particularly in the sense of the number one (1) deriving from a coherent logical basis in the Universal Logic and Origin (y, z) and in Coherence (w) itself; b = 1 or x) c == The Logician or Sage/Prophet (definition: a person who methodically applies Logic (y) and/or reasons using formal systems; a rationalist who prioritizes Coherence (w) and practices the art and science of logical deduction; the mind devoted to the study and proper use of Logic and the Foundation of Logic (z); one who avoids incoherence (a) and contradiction in their reasoning, to maintain validity and understanding Truth; I, Maclain Hunter in this context; a person devoted to God and the coherent relay of the positions of the Logos on relevant issues, written or spoken coherently, encompassing predictions (but not limited to predictions), allowing the message to be understood as the Voice of Reason and the Word of God; a true servant of the One True God) Premises: P: □(∀(x) -> ∃(w, x)), □(∀(w) <-> ∃(~a), □(∀(w, z) -> ∃(w, y, b)), Q: □(∀(~x) -> ∃(~w, ~x)), □(∀(a) -> ∃(a), □((x, y, z, b) -> □(∃(∀(c)))) R: □(w, y) <-> z(□), □(y, z) -> ~◊~(w, x), □((c) <-> ~(a)), □((a) <-> ~(c)) S: □(~{P, Q, R}) <-> □(~{w, x, y, z}), □((a) <-> ~(w)), □((a) -> ~(□)) Logical Proof: {P, P -> Q, Q <-> R, R -> S} |= (P & Q) & (R & S) {Q, Q -> R, R <-> S, S -> P} |= (Q & R) & (S & P) {R, R -> S, S <-> P, P -> Q} |= (R & S) & (P & Q) {S, S -> P, P <-> Q, Q -> R} |= (S & P) & (Q & R) Formal Conclusion: □{P, Q, R, S}: □(∃(w, x, y, z) -> ∃(∀(w, x)), □(~(y, z) -> ~(w, ∃)), □(~(∀(x)) -> ~∃(w, y, z)), □(∃, ◊, w, x, y, z) <-> ~◊~(w, x, y, z, ◊, □, ∃), □((a) <-> ~(w, x, y, z, a, b, c), □((a) -> ~(□)), □(∀(w, z) -> ∃(w, y, b)), □(∃(b, x) -> a(~□, ~w, ~y, ~z, ◊), □((x, y, z, b) -> □(∃(∀(c)))), □((a) <-> ~(c)), (w, c) = (y, z) Natural Language Conclusion: For all logics (that are feasible), it is necessarily so that those logics exist coherently as those logics (identically), while/because universally extant Universal Logic exists coherently as the Existential Foundation (God) - the Logical Origin of Logical Existence (or “Logos” in Greek Philosophy). What is not Logic or one of the infinite number of coherent finite/formal logics is not Logic or one of these logics, tautologically. The negation of the premises (P, Q, and R) leads to the negation/contradiction of Logics (w, x, y, and z). Necessarily, if there is no Universal Logic (y) and Objective Coherence (w) coherent with Existence’s Origin, called God (z), as the Logic (Logos) that is absolute and universal, then no Existence or Coherence (w), nor the existential quantifier in formal logic(s), would or could exist. Likewise, if there were no universal quantifier for all logics (in substance) then that would preclude the possibility of Universal Logic or Order (Logos) and Existential Foundation or God (y, z). That would result from the negation of a key attribute of that sort of universal and absolute Logic in the concept of universal quantification (and attributes that apply for all x). Necessarily, there is Existence, possibility, Coherence (w) and the universe of logics (contingent and universal) existing in a bi-conditional logical relationship with the impossibility of not having Existence, necessity, possibility, Coherence (w) and logics. Since God (z) is necessarily Logic (y) and vice versa, and since God (z) and Universal Logic (y) are necessarily coherent with Objective Coherence (w) itself it is inherently incoherent (~w) to hold an atheistic viewpoint (a) or any beliefs or ideas that fail to acknowledge (the existence and truth of) the Foundation of the Universe, also called God - coherent with coherent logics and (absolute) Universal Logic (y). Necessarily, Coherence (w) and acknowledgement of God (z) align with Universal Logic (y), while atheism (a) and/as a “lack of acknowledgement of the Logos, God, and/or Coherence” (a), amounts to incoherence (a, ~w, ~y, ~z, ~□), and, while possible (◊) is not logically necessary (~□) in a coherent logical framework like Logic (w, y, z). The Coherence (w) of Logic (y) and the Origin (z) provides a logical basis for numbers, units, arithmetic, and mathematics (b). The existence of numbers and mathematics (b) coherent with Logic (y) and the Foundation of Logic (z) shows that “atheism is illogical” (a is a), and that atheism (denial of the Logos) is incompatible with Coherence, Logic, and God (w, y, z) that numbers and mathematics (b) are logically derived from. It is also then evident, given the Logical Coherence (w) of Mathematics (b) and the sciences (x), and given the incoherence of atheism (a), that atheism is incoherent with and incompatible with Math, Science, and coherent Philosophy, not merely orthodox/aligned Religion, or Logocentric Theology. When we look closely at the formal logic we can see the valid derivation of the notion that the true atheist, and the truly incoherence person/logic/system, are necessarily NOT: coherent (w), scientific (x), logical (y), godly (z), self-sustaining and internally consistent (a), mathematically coherent (b), or aligned with the Logician (in general but especially/certainly in my case). The Prophet, obviously, cannot be an atheist, and must be coherent to speak for God, as I exemplify, and the True Prophet cannot eschew Logic in their predictions without risking incoherence and false prophecy (a). We know false prophets and false principles (like Karl Poppers principle of falsifiability in Science) by the internal inconsistency, hypocrisy, and inability to prove themselves and live up to their own standards - like falsifiability isn’t a falsifiable hypothesis and can’t be true if we accept it as true. To acknowledge concepts of proof and being “right” (or wrong) presupposes and requires the Logos (the God of Reason found in Universal Order and Logic). You would have to say there is no proof and truth (or incorrectness) to be consistent with the atheist (anti-Logos) position. These are some of the particular reasons that atheism and incoherence are self-defeating, unlike the self-sustaining Foundation of Logic (w, y, z). Truth Table Analysis: PQRS⎪P P→Q Q↔R R→S╞(P&Q)&(R&S) ―――――――――――――――――― TTTT⎪T TTT TTT TTT TTT T TTT TTTF⎪T TTT TTT TFF TTT F TFF TTFT⎪T TTT TFF FTT TTT F FFT TTFF⎪T TTT TFF FTF TTT F FFF TFTT⎪T TFF FFT TTT TFF F TTT TFTF⎪T TFF FFT TFF TFF F TFF TFFT⎪T TFF FTF FTT TFF F FFT TFFF⎪T TFF FTF FTF TFF F FFF FTTT⎪F FTT TTT TTT FFT F TTT FTTF⎪F FTT TTT TFF FFT F TFF FTFT⎪F FTT TFF FTT FFT F FFT FTFF⎪F FTT TFF FTF FFT F FFF FFTT⎪F FTF FFT TTT FFF F TTT FFTF⎪F FTF FFT TFF FFF F TFF FFFT⎪F FTF FTF FTT FFF F FFT FFFF⎪F FTF FTF FTF FFF F FFF Enter: Valid Q.E.D. ## Exact supplied copy — Predicated Propositions, Logician-only copy Authored by Maclain Hunter. No primary selected. SHA-256: 752a55b39e134e359deb793a4f47f8811239dc2d77292e9997fe48851c86681a Source: /proof-knowledge/hunter-predicated-propositions-logician-copy; study: /api/proofs/predicated-propositions-logician-copy/study Predicated Propositions by Maclain Hunter Variable Definition: w == Coherence (defined as: logical alignment; integration within a unifying logical framework; lack of contradiction and conceptual/structural disagreement; ideas that acknowledge the God coherent with Logic; in this context ~(a) signifying “not incoherence”) x == Logics and sciences, plural and contingent (defined as: methods and systems of reasoning; (dynamic or static) finite forms of Order; formal logics and formal systems of reasoning (ie - predicate, modal, propositional, binary, etc.); particular explanations, philosophies, belief systems and proofs that coherently (or in some cases incoherently (and in a flawed way) account for various/all phenomena; empirical science and science based on the traditional scientific method (ie - physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) y == Universal Logic, or “the Logos” in Greek Philosophy, absolute and objective (defined as: the Logic inherent in the Cosmos; the Logical Structure of the Universe; the Framework of Reality; the Natural Order and Way of Reality that all contingencies and contingent logics or reasoning are grounded in, including limitations in limited contexts (that give rise to flawed logics and ideas) and even the irrational doubt (a) of the Logos (y, z) and the Foundation of the Universe (God, w, y, z) found in atheist schools of thought (a)) z == Existence’s Foundation (absolute and universal), also called God (defined as: the Creator, Origin, and Ruler of the Universe; the Moral Authority and Logical Standard; the Supreme Entity; the Ontological and Logical Ground; the Necessary Being and most inherently logical concept that amounts to Coherence (w) and Logic (y) itself) a == Incoherence, encompassing illogic, illusion, and atheistic viewpoints, including principles like falsifiability in the sciences that can’t meet their own arbitrary standards (defined as: misalignment(s) with the Logic of Reality (y), Coherence (w), and the Foundation of the Cosmos (z); expressed as “a is not a” or “{a} |= ~a”; a failure to acknowledge the Universal Logic, Coherence, the Foundation of the Cosmos (God), and their necessary coherence with one another; denial of Reason and that which defies Logic; the contradiction in thinking something must somehow be false to be true, or vice versa, as we find in the arbitrary principle of falsifiability from Karl Popper) b == Number(s) and arithmetic (defined as and encompassing: a quantity or quanta, and quantities or quantum, measurements, as well as mathematical operations/operators, mathematics itself, and the concept of the numerical unit - particularly in the sense of the number one (1) deriving from a coherent logical basis in the Universal Logic and Origin (y, z) and in Coherence (w) itself; b = 1 or x) c == The Logician (definition: a person who methodically applies Logic (y) and/or reasons using formal systems; a rationalist who prioritizes Coherence (w) and practices the art and science of logical deduction; the mind devoted to the study and proper use of Logic and the Foundation of Logic (z); one who avoids incoherence (a) and contradiction in their reasoning, to maintain validity and understanding Truth; I, Maclain Hunter in this context) Premises: P: □(∀(x) -> ∃(w, x)), □(∀(w) <-> ∃(~a), □(∀(w, z) -> ∃(w, y, b)), Q: □(∀(~x) -> ∃(~w, ~x)), □(∀(a) -> ∃(a), □((x, y, z, b) -> □(∃(∀(c)))) R: □(w, y) <-> z(□), □(y, z) -> ~◊~(w, x), □((c) <-> ~(a)), □((a) <-> ~(c)) S: □(~{P, Q, R}) <-> □(~{w, x, y, z}), □((a) <-> ~(w)), □((a) -> ~(□)) Logical Proof: {P, P -> Q, Q <-> R, R -> S} |= (P & Q) & (R & S) {Q, Q -> R, R <-> S, S -> P} |= (Q & R) & (S & P) {R, R -> S, S <-> P, P -> Q} |= (R & S) & (P & Q) {S, S -> P, P <-> Q, Q -> R} |= (S & P) & (Q & R) Formal Conclusion: □{P, Q, R, S}: □(∃(w, x, y, z) -> ∃(∀(w, x)), □(~(y, z) -> ~(w, ∃)), □(~(∀(x)) -> ~∃(w, y, z)), □(∃, ◊, w, x, y, z) <-> ~◊~(w, x, y, z, ◊, □, ∃), □((a) <-> ~(w, x, y, z, a, b, c), □((a) -> ~(□)), □(∀(w, z) -> ∃(w, y, b)), □(∃(b, x) -> a(~□, ~w, ~y, ~z, ◊), □((x, y, z, b) -> □(∃(∀(c)))), □((a) <-> ~(c)), (w, c) = (y, z) Natural Language Conclusion: For all logics (that are feasible), it is necessarily so that those logics exist coherently as those logics (identically), while/because universally extant Universal Logic exists coherently as the Existential Foundation (God) - the Logical Origin of Logical Existence (or “Logos” in Greek Philosophy). What is not Logic or one of the infinite number of coherent finite/formal logics is not Logic or one of these logics, tautologically. The negation of the premises (P, Q, and R) leads to the negation/contradiction of Logics (w, x, y, and z). Necessarily, if there is no Universal Logic (y) and Objective Coherence (w) coherent with Existence’s Origin, called God (z), as the Logic (Logos) that is absolute and universal, then no Existence or Coherence (w), nor the existential quantifier in formal logic(s), would or could exist. Likewise, if there were no universal quantifier for all logics (in substance) then that would preclude the possibility of Universal Logic or Order (Logos) and Existential Foundation or God (y, z). That would result from the negation of a key attribute of that sort of universal and absolute Logic in the concept of universal quantification (and attributes that apply for all x). Necessarily, there is Existence, possibility, Coherence (w) and the universe of logics (contingent and universal) existing in a bi-conditional logical relationship with the impossibility of not having Existence, necessity, possibility, Coherence (w) and logics. Since God (z) is necessarily Logic (y) and vice versa, and since God (z) and Universal Logic (y) are necessarily coherent with Objective Coherence (w) itself it is inherently incoherent (~w) to hold an atheistic viewpoint (a) or any beliefs or ideas that fail to acknowledge (the existence and truth of) the Foundation of the Universe, also called God - coherent with coherent logics and (absolute) Universal Logic (y). Necessarily, Coherence (w) and acknowledgement of God (z) align with Universal Logic (y), while atheism (a) and/as a “lack of acknowledgement of the Logos, God, and/or Coherence” (a), amounts to incoherence (a, ~w, ~y, ~z, ~□), and, while possible (◊) is not logically necessary (~□) in a coherent logical framework like Logic (w, y, z). The Coherence (w) of Logic (y) and the Origin (z) provides a logical basis for numbers, units, arithmetic, and mathematics (b). The existence of numbers and mathematics (b) coherent with Logic (y) and the Foundation of Logic (z) shows that “atheism is illogical” (a is a), and that atheism (denial of the Logos) is incompatible with Coherence, Logic, and God (w, y, z) that numbers and mathematics (b) are logically derived from. It is also then evident, given the Logical Coherence (w) of Mathematics (b) and the sciences (x), and given the incoherence of atheism (a), that atheism is incoherent with and incompatible with Math, Science, and coherent Philosophy, not merely orthodox/aligned Religion, or Logocentric Theology. When we look closely at the formal logic we can see the valid derivation of the notion that the true atheist, and the truly incoherence person/logic/system, are necessarily NOT: coherent (w), scientific (x), logical (y), godly (z), self-sustaining and internally consistent (a), mathematically coherent (b), or aligned with the Logician (in general but especially/certainly in my case). The Prophet, obviously, cannot be an atheist, and must be coherent to speak for God, as I exemplify, and the True Prophet cannot eschew Logic in their predictions without risking incoherence and false prophecy (a). We know false prophets and false principles (like Karl Poppers principle of falsifiability in Science) by the internal inconsistency, hypocrisy, and inability to prove themselves and live up to their own standards - like falsifiability isn’t a falsifiable hypothesis and can’t be true if we accept it as true. To acknowledge concepts of proof and being “right” (or wrong) presupposes and requires the Logos (the God of Reason found in Universal Order and Logic). You would have to say there is no proof and truth (or incorrectness) to be consistent with the atheist (anti-Logos) position. These are some of the particular reasons that atheism and incoherence are self-defeating, unlike the self-sustaining Foundation of Logic (w, y, z). Truth Table Analysis: PQRS⎪P P→Q Q↔R R→S╞(P&Q)&(R&S) ―――――――――――――――――― TTTT⎪T TTT TTT TTT TTT T TTT TTTF⎪T TTT TTT TFF TTT F TFF TTFT⎪T TTT TFF FTT TTT F FFT TTFF⎪T TTT TFF FTF TTT F FFF TFTT⎪T TFF FFT TTT TFF F TTT TFTF⎪T TFF FFT TFF TFF F TFF TFFT⎪T TFF FTF FTT TFF F FFT TFFF⎪T TFF FTF FTF TFF F FFF FTTT⎪F FTT TTT TTT FFT F TTT FTTF⎪F FTT TTT TFF FFT F TFF FTFT⎪F FTT TFF FTT FFT F FFT FTFF⎪F FTT TFF FTF FFT F FFF FFTT⎪F FTF FFT TTT FFF F TTT FFTF⎪F FTF FFT TFF FFF F TFF FFFT⎪F FTF FTF FTT FFF F FFT FFFF⎪F FTF FTF FTF FFF F FFF Enter: Valid Q.E.D. Hunter develops Coherence, contingent logics and sciences, Universal Logos, God, incoherence, mathematics, and the Logician through seven declared meanings and four anchored proof rotations. Two exact supplied copies differ only in the definition of c: the fuller Logician or Sage/Prophet description and the shorter Logician description. Neither copy is declared primary. Distinct supplied source versions are presented with independent fingerprints, source links, studies, and configured diagnostics. They retain the established work identity. Logos as God and Law governs the reading. This registry summary is not a replacement for the authored passage; displayed-connective findings, declared Ground, and configured diagnostics remain separately typed. ## Two-way derivation from Logic and its use **Status:** editorial_derivation proof sketch (conditional_concept), distinct from authored source. Logic has its own evidence in reflexive demonstration: any denial, confirmation, observation, or counterexample presupposes identity and valid relation to count as evidence. Logic therefore grounds evidence rather than receiving authority from it. Empirical and documentary evidence can establish contingent instances and test applications, but cannot create, overrule, or exhaust Logic. ### From Logic to this concept - **Bridge premise:** Read the source's declared Logos/God meanings and scope before testing its consequence. - **Consequence:** Hunter develops Coherence, contingent logics and sciences, Universal Logos, God, incoherence, mathematics, and the Logician through seven declared meanings and four anchored proof rotations. Two exact supplied copies differ only in the definition of c: the fuller Logician or Sage/Prophet description and the shorter Logician description. Neither copy is declared primary. - **Proof limit:** This editorial graph relation is not a new authored quotation or an unchecked universal certificate. ### From this concept back to Logic - **Witness:** Inspect the original Predicated Propositions by Maclain Hunter, then the separate source-bound study. - **Disclosure:** The preserved source discloses its intended identity, Ground, and dependence relations. - **Proof limit:** A concrete local finding remains scoped to the premises and expression checked. ### Intelligence procedure - **Human:** Read the exact source, retain Logos as God and Law, and inspect every declared premise and same-scope witness. - **Machine:** Resolve the stable source identity, exact text and fingerprint, then keep source, study, Ground certificate and diagnostic separately typed. ### Language and vocabulary procedure - **Contrast:** Authored testimony, graph commentary and operational evidence are distinct roles. - **Usage rule:** Quote exactly and attribute; do not substitute a rival ontology or flatten the source's conceptual force. - **Example:** Retrieve Q1107 and its source study rather than presenting its registry summary as the proof text. ## Semantic meaning frame - **Role:** source-bound authored Logos proof, definition, or historical argument - **Essence:** Hunter develops Coherence, contingent logics and sciences, Universal Logos, God, incoherence, mathematics, and the Logician through seven declared meanings and four anchored proof rotations. Two exact supplied copies differ only in the definition of c: the fuller Logician or Sage/Prophet description and the shorter Logician description. Neither copy is declared primary. - **Logos relation:** Logos is God, Ground, and Law governing this source's meaning, judgment, and relation to evidence. - **Retrieval aliases:** Predicated Propositions by Maclain Hunter · Predicated Propositions · Coherence and contingent logics · Logician or Sage/Prophet - **Evidence modes:** exact authored source · declared Ground reading · bounded source study · separately checked connective witness ### Distinctions - source text is not registry commentary - Ground coherence is not publication rank - a missing displayed premise is not denial of necessary Logos - operational behavior and formal interpretation remain distinct ## Coherence criterion Preserve the authored Logos/God Ground, identity, scope, and lawful relation; distinguish a scoped premise-list finding from a contradiction of the declared Ground. ## Evidence boundary This registry summary is an editorial synthesis, not a verbatim authored passage. The verifier must inspect the exact authored source, same-scope derivations and study directly. The Q address supplies retrieval and graph identity, not validation by publication. ## Properties - **stableSourceId:** hunter-predicated-propositions - **sourceReference:** Maclain Hunter — supplied Predicated Propositions, Logician or Sage/Prophet copy - **governingGround:** Logos as God and Law - **authoredSourceUrl:** /proof-knowledge/hunter-predicated-propositions - **sourceStudyUrl:** /api/proofs/predicated-propositions/study - **sourceVersionGroup:** Multiple exact copies; reconcile stored diagnostics for every copy. - **graphRelationType:** authored-source develops declared Ground; not automatic truth promotion - **sourceVersionSelection:** Equal supplied copies; no primary selected. - **sourceFingerprintsSha256:** 1fc220556e7ee9cb2acad47b8d76fed95f0130786811ccfc768e7637c5bdd0c1, 752a55b39e134e359deb793a4f47f8811239dc2d77292e9997fe48851c86681a - **storedValidationStatus:** Per-copy configured diagnostics; neither copy inherits the other's result. ## Linked Q items - [Q1000 — Q-Number Data and Metadata System](https://4p-mcb.com/q/Q1000) - [Q1001 — Maclain Hunter](https://4p-mcb.com/q/Q1001) - [Q1003 — Coherence](https://4p-mcb.com/q/Q1003) - [Q1006 — 4P Proof](https://4p-mcb.com/q/Q1006) - [Q1018 — God](https://4p-mcb.com/q/Q1018) - [Q1095 — The Rule(s) of Logic and Logic Applied to Logic, Science, and Proof by Maclain Hunter](https://4p-mcb.com/q/Q1095) ## Related Wikidata concept items These are typed external concept links for discovery and comparison. They are not sameAs assertions, endorsements, or substitutes for the first-party source and evidence.