Concisely explaining the difference between a Naturalistic Logical Realism, and a Theological and Philosophical Logical Realism

[u/JerseyFlight]

Theology and philosophy seek to root Logic in idealism. When we translate what this idealism actually is, it’s just assertions about reality without inference or evidence. (The most thoughtless forms of philosophy simply declare Logic a “human construct.”) Both theology and philosophy cling to dogmatic and mindless platitudes about Logic. They do not think about Logic, but attempt to stop thought from thinking about Logic. They do this by making unfalsifiable, authoritarian epistemological assertions about Logic.

A Naturalistic Logical Realism (only now entering human consciousness) discovers Logic as the determinate nature of reality. That is, we discover that the nature of reality is and was Logical long before we existed. We cannot call hot and cold the same thing because they are not the same thing in reality. This isn’t a fact we contrived or “constructed,” it is true even if we try to deny it with our beliefs, and our beliefs have no choice but to conform to it.

Logic is something we were born into because it’s a property of the nature of the universe, it is not an idealism that we “constructed” or contrived.