Considering all self evident truths are assumed, we can observed they exist as transitive states to further transitive states.
For example
1 + 1 = 2
I assume each of these symbols.
So using "•(x)" as an assumed context and "--->" as a progression to another assumption (which is an assumption) we can observe that each assumption is grounded in an inherent form that is fundamentally "void" considering it is assumed.
1 transfers to 1 through +, which transfers to 2 through =.
•((1)(+))--->•((1)(=))--->•(2)
•--->•--->• as •--->• as •
The above transition is correct form
So is
•(1)--->•(+)--->•(1)--->•(=)--->•(2)
•--->•--->•--->•--->• as •--->• as •
Both of the above are correct
So is
•(((((1)+)1)=)2)
As
---> as •
So on and so forth.
The manner in which the equation is assumed observes different transitive properties of one assumption to another as an assumption which assumption being an empty form in itself.
Standard linear reasoning composed of meta linear reasoning.
Regardless of how one is to assume each assumption as a context, group of contexts as an assumption, or whatever....each manner of assumption takes on an inherent form of various transitional properties that variate through eachother.
These transition properties, one assumption to another, are constant as forms and provide the foundation for how we reason however these "foundations" are so particular that they repeat as generalities where these generalities existing as particulars under a different assumed point of awareness.
Each symbol is thus subject to a transitive form to another symbol, as each symbol is an assumed context.
However each symbol as subject to transitive form is also a variation of a transitive form:
1 as
•(•0-->•0) as •(•--->•) as •--->• as •
Or
•(•1--->•1) ****same form above
Or
2-1=2. ***which replicates the same transitive forms above.
So when dealing with assumed truths, the transitive process maintain constant underlying forms, which even under variation transition to eachother through their own natures at a meta level.
We assume forms through assumption as form which is fundamentally empty in context as an assumption.
Logic at its foundations, ie its basic assumed axioms, is fundamentally empty context.
Instead of just math or logic (ie language) you can apply this to experience as well.
One memory, as assumed, is empty in itself and progresses to another memory as empty with this chain of memories being an empty context in itself.
•(•(M1)--->•(M2))
Even remembering memories as a memory is subject to this same nature.
•(•(•(M1)--->•(M2)))--->•(M3))
The same occurs with action and not action respectively where a dog is assumed, walking is assumed, the dog walking is assumed...etc.
Each of these transitive forms, grounded in assumption as assumption, existing as the same fundamental forms in infinite variation.
Thus the laws of logic and reason, even experience, necessitates a simultaneous randomness and order.
Randomness as continual variation of meta forms. Order as the continuity of the same basic forms. Empty context, symbolized as ⊙ considering its simultaneous linearism and circularity, is both meaningful and void.
Thus all logic, math and experience observed for what it truly is is strictly "mu" in nature...ie neither right nor wrong...yet right and wrong still exist as empty contexts.