Epistemological Error(s) of Affirming a Disjunct

The argument π∧(π∨¬α)∴α is a false exclusionary disjunct. It falsely excludes the logical possibility that π∧¬α. The exclusion is false because, by virtue of principium exclusi tertii sive medii inter duo contradictoria, it is an a priori truth that ¬(π∧¬α)∨(π∧¬α) and, by virtue of principium contradictionis, it is false a priori that (π∧¬α)∧¬(π∧¬α) such that, absent sufficient cause for doing so, to exclude the logical possibility that π∧¬α is to violate principium rationis sufficientis (and amounts to argumentum ad ignorantiam). Likewise, π∧¬(¬π∧α)∴α is the fallacy of the excluded middle, which is logically equivalent to a false exclusionary disjunct. It is valid to argue π∧(¬π∨α)∴α such that, by virtue of lex parsimoniae, it is superfluous to posit π∨¬α when arguing π∧((π∨¬α)∧(¬π∨α))∴α.