[Jack]

this view is logicaly invalide because it violates the law of the excluded middle and law of non-contraddition-these are your epistemological laws frm your logic you logic says it must be one or the other not a conicidenta appositorum

Please cite the substance and origin of those laws and explain your terms. I have reason to believe you have no idea what you're talking about. I'll help:

Whether a system of logic satisfies the law of excluded middle depends on details of the logic such as the behavior of disjunction and negation, the set of truth values, and whether there are truth value gaps (that is, whether the valuation function is total or partial). Examples of logical systems that contradict this idea include ternary logic, in which statements may be true, false, or unknown; fuzzy logic, in which statements may be true, false, or somewhere in between; and intuitionistic logic, in which the notion of truth is dispensed with entirely, and provability considered in its place.

Law of excluded middle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia