A revisionary criterion that invalidates the core of classical logic bears a burden of proof that mere 'relevance intuitions' cannot discharge without abandoning the classical framework wholesale.

?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

Relevance intuitions(as used in relevance logic and philosophy of logic): Gut feelings or instinctive judgments about what actually matters or is connected to a particular logical argument.
Revisionary criterion(as used in logic and philosophy of language): A rule or standard that challenges and changes how we've traditionally understood something, rather than just describing how things already work.
burden of proof(Used to frame the default presumption against coercive institutional structures.): The obligation on institutions employing authority, hierarchy, or domination to demonstrate that such arrangements are justified given existing conditions.
classical logic(Contrasted with Hegel's dialectical approach that accepts contradictions): Aristotelian logic that dominated during Hegel's lifetime

Based on where you are in your exploration