I try and explain what I’m on about in this thread but basically I don’t want to be forced to use LEM. Why? Because I want to show a refutation by contradiction not a proof. If I’m forced to use LEM, then someone could rightly say that when I refute some premise ‘P’ through showing how it leads to contradiction, then I’m forced to admit that “‘P’ doesn’t exist” through indirect proof aka an affirming negation. It is my hypothesis that neither the Teacher nor Nagarjuna believed “proof by contradiction” aka “indirect proof” is a valid way of knowing. Given my recent experience, I fear derailing this thread again so maybe it is best to start a new one or take it to a PM. Think I’ll shut up now. 
SuttaCentral