CIA+Clause

This clause is reminiscent of the aforementioned theorems attempting to explain away why we avoid using the supporting theorems at times in order to avoid contradictions. **According to the CIA Clause [Confound it All Clause], a logic system's components may not be used in some scenarios that could be used to disprove themselves, and that any postulate that could lead to contradiction must have the CIA Clause attached to it. If there is a new declaration of complete expansion of any postulate, if and only if it clashes with the CIA Clause, then a new postulate will be made, that will be renamed as the anti-postulate x to denote that it will be a postulate to prove the anti-established logic system. This will more or less avoid true contradiction by acknowledging the possible existence of anti-systems, whether or not they raise the possibility of a threat to the established system's existence. If by chance the original system is brought down at some point in time, if it is so wished that it will still exist in our dimension, then it will be declared superexistent, and if that provokes another chain of counter-existence, then the same rule will be applied, infinitely if needed.** This is one fo the concluding postulates to be referenced concerning the state of the current system and the admittance of new systems, so that all may co-exist, to better achieve clarity and a higher form of learning.