Proving We Are All Goats: A Logical Argument

  • Thread starter jimmy p
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Argument
In summary, there is evidence that knowledge may actually hinder an individual's earning potential, as the theorem "the more you know, the less you earn" suggests. This is supported by a mathematical equation that shows as knowledge decreases, money increases, regardless of the amount of work done. Additionally, a logical proof has been presented to argue that everything is, in fact, a goat. This is based on the idea that if the opposite statement is false, then the original statement must be true. However, this relies on propositional logic, which may not necessarily reflect reality.
  • #1
jimmy p
Gold Member
399
65
Why Bother?

Throughout the ages many have suspected that there's no point in learning anything. Now, however, we have evidence that this is true! At least it transpires that knowledge acts as a brake on an individual's earning potential. This theorem (the more you know the less you earn) can be supported by a mathematical equation based on the following two postulates:

Postulate 1: Knowledge is power

Postulate 2: Time is money

As every engineer knows: Power=Work/Time

Since: Knowledge=Power

and: Time=Money

by substitution we have: Knowledge=Work/Money

Solving for Money, we get: Money=Work/Knowledge

Thus, as Knowledge approaches zero, Money approaches infinity, regardless of the amount of work done.

CONCLUSION: The less you know, the more you make.


and how about one to prove that we are all goats

The Logical Proof

The proposition "Everything is a Goat" is either true or not true.
If it is false, then it's opposite must be true.
The opposite of "everything" is "nothing", which give us the proposition "Nothing is a Goat".*
Now, this statement is clearly false, for goats certainly exist - we have all seen them. This means that it's opposite must be true.
Therefore, "Everything is a Goat" must be a true statement.

PS. This relies on propositional logic eg. any statement is either true or false and if proven false, then the opposite statement must be true, for example, the statement "It is raining outside", either it is or it is not.

Makes you think huh?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Originally posted by jimmy p
This means that it's opposite must be true.
no it doesn't.
 
  • #3
We are using propositional logic according to which the opposite of a false statement is a true one and vice versa :smile:
 
  • #4
Dont try and have a discussion with him jimmy, he's nuts.
 
  • #5
Originally posted by Andy
Dont try and have a discussion with him jimmy, he's nuts.
??
 
  • #6
Originally posted by jimmy p
We are using propositional logic according to which the opposite of a false statement is a true one and vice versa :smile:

point taken :)
 

1. What is the purpose of "Proving We Are All Goats: A Logical Argument"?

The purpose of "Proving We Are All Goats: A Logical Argument" is to use logical reasoning and evidence to demonstrate that humans and goats have more similarities than differences, and therefore, can be considered as part of the same species.

2. What evidence is presented in the argument?

The argument presents evidence from various fields such as biology, genetics, and behavior, to show that humans and goats share many common features, including DNA, physiological functions, and social behaviors.

3. How does the argument address potential objections or counterarguments?

The argument addresses potential objections or counterarguments by anticipating them and providing logical explanations or evidence to refute them. It also acknowledges that the idea of humans being goats may seem absurd, but argues that it is a matter of perspective and definition.

4. What implications does this argument have for our understanding of human identity?

This argument challenges traditional notions of human identity and challenges us to rethink our understanding of what it means to be human. It suggests that our perception of human identity should not be limited by physical, cultural, or societal constructs, but rather by our shared characteristics and abilities.

5. How has this argument been received by the scientific community?

This argument has sparked a lot of debate and discussion in the scientific community. While some scientists have found the argument intriguing and thought-provoking, others have criticized it for oversimplifying the concept of species and disregarding important differences between humans and goats. Overall, it has stimulated further research and exploration into the nature of human identity.

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
907
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
2
Replies
54
Views
3K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
847
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
2
Replies
40
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • STEM Academic Advising
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
844
  • General Math
Replies
26
Views
2K
Back
Top