Previous: Objections to the Axioms (Part 2)

*Question: “Are Axioms Proven or Merely Assumptions?”*
“Are first
principles or the axioms of logic (such as identity, non-contradiction)
provable? If not, then isn't just an intuitive assumption that they are true?[...]”[1]

The axioms are neither “proven” nor “assumed.”

(In the
Objectivist view of axiomatic corollaries, Aristotle’s “Laws of Thought” are
corollaries of the Existence axiom. And
more specifically, the Law or Principle of Non-contradiction and the Law of the
Excluded Middle are restatements/corollaries of the Law of Identity, which is a
corollary of “existence exists.”[2] So I’ll consider this question as broad
enough to encompass any first principle, including the Objectivist axioms.)

I’ll make several points about why this can’t be the case
when speaking of actual axioms.