Do logical absolutes hold up to their own scrutiny? Do they need to?
I always debate trying to keep in mind the logical fallacies and remain as logical and reasonable as I can. But someone recently put forward to me that you can't prove something like truth without presupposing truth. To say that you "can" would be a truth statement. The repercussions of this in debate can be similar to Solipsism. It has the potential to derail any conversation because "Do we even really know what we know?"