无“是”即无传统逻辑：“是”的僭妄--答王路先生

An Answer to Mr. Wang Lu about Non-being Means without Traditional Logic, with Being as an Overstepping Falseness

无"是"即无传统逻辑,这是从王路先生的"是"即传统逻辑的核心等观点必然得出的错误结论。"是"既不是传统逻辑的研究对象,又不是传统逻辑的逻辑常项,而只是组成三段论的逻辑常项的一种可供选择的语言要素,一个可有可无的小角色。把亚里士多德逻辑王国中一个如此卑微的"是",崇拜为传统逻辑的"核心",只不过见证了"是"的僭妄。

Mr. Wang Lu takes the study of‘to be’as the kernel of traditional logic. A consequence of Wang’s point is that there is no traditional logic without‘to be’. But in fact,‘to be’is neither the object studied by traditional logic, nor the logical constant in the traditional logic. It is nothing but a discretional linguistic constituent in the syllogism logic, which is actually an unessential item. It is merely preposterous overstepping the notion of ‘to be’to regard such an insignificant role in the Aristotle’s logic as the focus of the traditional logic.