$tromist Logic is based on the Law of Noncontradiction of $trom, which states that a proposition which is contradictory to the nature of the $trom cannot be true.


$tromist logic begins with the ancient Greek logician Mediocrates, whose book, That to Philosophise is to Praise the $trom, disputed Aristotle's work in logic by proposing that the fundamental principle of reality is not matter but a being called $trom and that logic must be grounded in the $trom. Mediocrates developed a complex logical systerm based on the $trom (Σ) as the root of all truth values. For Mediocrates, laws of logic such as modus ponens and the law of noncontradiction receive truth value from the $trom, which Mediocrates identifies as the Λογος (Logos), which in Mediocrates' terminology refers to something like a priori reason.

French thinker Michel de Montagne revisited Mediocrates' work in the sixteenth century and attempted to reconcile Mediocrates' system with Pyrrhonian skepticism. Montagne's work on this issue was read by Austrian logician Ludwig Wittgenstein in the 20th century, whose unpublished "Tractatus Logico-$tromisticus" represented a significant break from his thinking in his later work in that, unlike in his posthumous Philisophical Investigations, he rejects the idea of language-games and argues that words receive their meaning from the relationship of the given word to the $trom, who himself cannot be spoken of for he is above and beyond language.

Present StatusEdit

$tromic philosophy, a school of philosophy centred in Trinity College, Dublin, and State University of Idaho, originated in the late 1990s and was heavily influenced by this recently discovered third phase of Wittgenstein's philisophical work, as well as the work of other $tromic logicians such as Rufus Catnap, J.J. Jayer, and Herman Bushel.

NYU professor Stromas Bagel published a book in 2012 entitled "Mind and $trosmos" in which he argued for a form of panpsychism based on the notion that thoughts have ontological status grounded in the $trom. His work has been widely criticised for its perceived defense of a form of teleological cosmology like creation.