traditional modal logic, the disruption of proposition structure, and the sufficiency and monopoly in modals

The separation of ontological issues from ontology is one of the most important issues in epistemology. The rules of logic are responsible for analyzing and explaining the laws of detection Unknown conception and Unknown ratification. In traditional logic, the proposition, as the subject of the logic of assertion, is Logical Secondary intelligible and has a formal and anecdotal truth. Formal logic is responsible for providing the instruments of composition between the theorems. The theorem content, the type of its connection with outside world and its Semantic issues are outside from this domain. It seems that the modal discussions in traditional logic, in some cases, have provided the interference of matter and form and entry of some objective rules into the subjective proposition. Actuality, permanence and faculty are Different from the formal. These are related to the process of objective objects in the external world. Adding these modals to the theorem structure has caused confusion, complexity, discrepancy, and ambiguity in traditional modal logic. In this article, we have demonstrated by analytical way that traditional logic can be criticized for adding modals to the proposition structure and, and for limiting the modal logic in certain modals.