This the second part of the theory of the objective principle and as at were, it will be observed that when the first principle is true merely for our minds, it may not be true in themselves. And secondly, when the first principle is true in every mind and everywhere, it simply means that they are objectively true in themselves independent of our thinking. The reason stern from the fact that because, in the first place, we tends to make them to be true by restricting their true-value in our intellect, thereby making it a purely a subjective concept. And secondly, their true-value no doubt, tends to conform to the reality that seems to indicate that there exist a direct perception of the very concept in its objectivity.

However, this simply come to put in evidence the importance of the problem involved in the knowledge of the very concept of the ‘First Principle” in its application, although, these principles tends to form the very foundation of all Scientific and Philosophical knowledge. The same is true, that the First principle is rooted in the “Principle of no-contradiction”, which states that a thing cannot be and be at the same time, or that something cannot be something and be something at the same time. In this principle what seems to be in evidence, is the comparison between the “being and not being “of which there cannot be middle way or thing between for instance that =”is and is-not”, but if on the contrary, there has to be something, the question is, what could that something be possibly be.

However, it is suggested that it will be nothing less than-“is or is-not” of which if it –“is”- it will simply mean, it –“is not” and the same is true, if is “being” it means it is “not-being”, therefore it means there will never be a middle something between the two terms, otherwise, it becomes a contradiction in term. In virtue of the principle of no-contradiction, it is clear that a thing cannot be there and be there at the same time. The same is true that, it is self- evidence that either it is or it is-not, which lead to the “Principle of excluded Middle”.

The “Principle of Excluded Middle” state that a preposition is either true or false and it cannot be true and false at the same time.in any of its application. It is clear that the ultimate criterion of truth as the ultimate motive of all certitude reside in in what come to be called the Self –evidence through the internal, immediate and objective evidence of reality as it manifest itself to our intellect and recognize by the intellect as such. If this is so, the question remains, of how is error possible, since it appear that error could not occur in judgment. However, error is attributed to a non-correspondence and non-conformity to the intellect with the object in question of judgment, because it involved the affirmation of what is true and in the denier of what is true, since truth is the result of what is self-evidence. Therefore, error has its origin from lack of the real, in the presence of apparent evidence.

Then is the “Principle of sufficient Reason “which state that, if a thing is “being or is not being ” this simply mean that it is “either, it has its being from itself, which means that it is neither reduce by others non introduce by another”. In this perspective, according to the metaphysical interpretation, it is substantial and not accidental in nature, hence, the principle of sufficient reason of being. It must be observed that when it is not –being or is- not, it means that it is substantially reduced or introduced by another, and it accidental in nature,therefore, has no sufficient reason for its being but only a necessary reason of being and therefore , it is accidental and not substantial in nature. Wherefore, it is evidence that every being has a sufficient reason for its “being” otherwise, there would be no difference between “being and non-being”.