Pure logic is first a real object

"Man is God in the making." (Manu)

Definition or denotation is first an object and secondarily a definition. Numerical or linguistic identity is always less than an object.

Pure logic or pure thought do not really exist outside our perceptions and experience of these things, it's an epistemological game to say otherwise. Pure logic may exist without us, but someone in the future has to think the pure logic. What I am thinking may be interesting, or even beautiful mathematics, but so what? What is important is the real object. Do the mathematics relate to real objects or is it only mind games?

Pure logic, definition and denotation become idols that can lead to a rejection or downgrading of material life, which has happened in both religion and philosophy where definitions are often physically irrelevant. Objects are not pure logic even if pure logic can define them.

I understand Godhood as a Real Object, that is, a Real Supreme Object, or Objects, a supermaterial object, and not something reduced to a number or definition in my mind, however beautiful.  Some have even made a God of "nothing" as the dialectical opposite of "something," which is the ultimate put-down of real objects.

Men of the mind have always tried to usurp men of the body. The epistemological domain and ontological definitions do not effect real objects, and this is true all the way to Godhood.  Perhaps we need a new philosophy.