
So, we know that the Authority over Truth operates by Redefining existing Logic.
From what I understand, this Redefinition can occur through two preliminary processes: Ambiguity or Deconstruction; in both scenarios, the Definition of Truth only happens at the end of the corresponding Redefinition process.
The first form of Redefinition consists of the Chaos Mist introducing Ambiguity into Logic, making it blurred, only to then Define the valid “Truth.”
For example: Suppose a Red Priest is attacking the Chaos Mist.
Standard logic: attack → hits → the Chaos Mist dies on the spot.
The Chaos Mist could introduce Ambiguity to this Logic: “after the hit, who is the 'bearer' of the attack's result? The executor? The target? A third party?” → this would open up room to Redefine the “ownership” of the consequence (after all, “He is the Truth and everything within the Gray area is Defined by Him”).
In this way, the Chaos Mist could invert the position of the “consequence bearer” to the Red Priest himself, or use someone from his army as a scapegoat.
The second form of Redefinition consists of the Chaos Mist Deconstructing Logic, invalidating the path that would lead to the original conclusion by demolishing the pillars that support a given system. From there, “He” reconstructs a new logical structure within the Grayness, where a different conclusion becomes valid.
Example of original Logic: “Holy is good, Profane is evil.”
The Chaos Mist could make it so: “Holy depends on who defines it” and “Profane may be necessary” → the opposition would lose its meaning and you wouldn't be able to use that logic to judge anything.
Only then could the Chaos Mist do something like: “Profane is the true purity.”
Well, this is my understanding of the vague information we have; what are your thoughts?