The Impossibility Of All Things Being Possible

If everything was possible, whether in the sense of being metaphysically capable of being true or of being epistemologically unverifiable and unfalsifiable so that one cannot know if it is true or false, then nothing would be impossible.  If, however, no individual idea is impossible, that is, incapable of being true, then it is impossible for all things to be possible, since anything contrary to this "truth" would still be impossible.  Even without directly acknowledging logical axioms, a person will always hold to this contradiction if they genuinely believe that anything is possible.  It is in actuality true necessarily that only things which are consistent with logical axioms and other necessary truths are possible, though almost no one chooses to be intelligent enough left to themselves to have as much as started exploring issues of logical necessity and possibility without making assumptions.

If nothing was true, it would be true that nothing is true, so truth still exists; this much is the case regardless of what else is.  If nothing followed logically by necessity from anything else, or if what followed by was not inherently true, it would follow logically from the nature of reality that nothing follows from anything else (or that what would have followed is not true) and that it is not necessarily true.  Thus, one thing logically follows from another with inherent truth either way.  If contradictions were possible, it would only be because contradictions being impossible is false, and so contradiction is still excluded from truth in this regard.  In other words, contradiction would still be incapable of being true!  These and a handful of other such things are intrinsically true and thus absolutely certain.

In turn, if something is inherently true, nothing else can be true which conflicts with it, for that would require its falsity.  A necessary truth cannot be false, so it would be whatever contradicts them that cannot possibly be true instead of the opposite.  As abstract necessary truths that depend on nothing other than themselves--axioms and other logical facts stemming from them--the laws of logic are what metaphysically dictate possibility and impossibility.  Yes, if all things were possible, the idea would still entail that it is impossible for anything to be impossible, though this itself would have to be impossible--much like how pure relativism entails that all things are relative, in denial of logical necessities, while also holding that this truth is absolute, rendering it false one way or another.

The real error of the concept that everything is possible, though, is that logical axioms cannot be false because they are inherently true, not hinging on God or the cosmos or any other being's preferences or perceptions.  Indeed, each of these things and all others besides logic itself depend on reason, not the other way around, and necessary truths could not have been any other way, unlike the world's exact laws of physics or historical events or someone's subjective experiences.  It is utterly impossible for all things to be possible since logic can only be true and whatever conflicts with it can only be false.  The metaphysical and epistemological arbiter of all things is reason, superior to all else for its intrinsic veracity and thus supreme centrality, immutability, and absolute certainty.  Nothing could be more simple and yet more abstract.