Laws of Logic - For Just Thoughts or Ultimately for Real Things?

I've suggested this meeting since it comes out of my recent reading of Locke and commentary on his philosophy, and the pondering of what I read in relation to discussions we have had. I'd like to discuss it sometime.

Do the laws, or if you prefer, rules, of logic apply to thoughts, to correctly order them into coherent thoughts? Or do they derive from the fact that the real things referred to in propositions must conform to what logically sound reasoning indicates? This will naturally lead to questions about to what exactly the terms of our sentences refer.

Let's say we collect a bunch of propositions from our experience [of reality] and they are [or are assumed to be] true. Then we apply the laws of logic and sound reasoning about those and arrive at conclusions, what can we say about those conclusions? If we look at our experience [of reality] are we guaranteed to find that what the conclusions say will in fact be as the conclusions say? What could go wrong? What does your answers to the questions imply about deep philosophical views you hold?

If you have the time and interest, here are some links to look at at before the meeting. THIS IS HERE FOR YOUR BENEFIT. THERE IS NO EXPECTATION THAT YOU WILL READ THIS BEFORE THE MEETING. I don't think I'll be reading all of this! If just SOME of you read SOME of this, we'll have some more material to discuss and debate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_thought

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-informal/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logical-consequence

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/propositions/

Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Locke - An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/#LimHumUnd)

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/reference/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/facts/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-correspondence/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/states-of-affairs/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/truth-identity/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/intentionality/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-intensional/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-ontology/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/induction-problem/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/square/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/practical-reason/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/practical-reason-action/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-ancient/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-logic/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-hume-causality/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/analytic-synthetic/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logical-truth/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nonexistent-objects/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/transcendental-arguments/

Does anyone have access to this? I came across it in a bibliography. I haven't read it and I don't have access to it.

Hodes, H., 2004, “On the Sense and Reference of a Logical Constant”, Philosophical Quarterly, 54: 134–65.