The Logical Argument for the Picture's Claim

  • Thread starter 1MileCrash
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Argument
In summary, the conversation discusses the claim made in a picture and whether it is agreed upon by logicians/mathematicians. It is clarified that the statement refers to planets devoid of life and robots, but it is argued that this interpretation is a stretch. The concept of nonfunctional robots is also mentioned as a valid critique. The conversation ends with a humorous suggestion to leave Earth and join the "cool robots" on Mars.
  • #1
1MileCrash
1,342
41
Do the logicians/mathematicians agree with the picture's claim?
 

Attachments

  • IMG_180671966141979.jpeg
    IMG_180671966141979.jpeg
    42.2 KB · Views: 452
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Seems fine, technically inhabited refers to living things but it's not such an unusual use that it doesn't make sense.
 
  • #3
So, AFAIK there are nonfunctional robots on Venus, for example.

Furthermore, one may read this as "nothing other than robots inhabits this planet" in which that statement is arguably true for any planet devoid of life and robots, like Saturn, but that's a bit of a stretch in how the statement is interpreted.

One may even be completely smug and say that nothing besides dragons lives on Saturn.
 
  • #4
You've lost me. How can it be true for planets that have no robots when the statement is that there are robots present?
 
  • #5
Ryan_m_b said:
You've lost me. How can it be true for planets that have no robots when the statement is that there are robots present?

Well, it really can't, reasonably.

But I think the existence of nonfunctional robots is a valid critique.
 
  • #6
An assertion of non-existence can only be sustained by an examination of the entire universe of discussion. Beware the Black Swan hiding in inductive inference.
 
  • #7
Beam me up, Scotty. There's nothing but a bunch of whiny, selfish and greedy primates down here. Let's go to Mars and cruise with the cool robots.
 

1. What is the logical argument for the picture's claim?

The logical argument for the picture's claim is a structured and reasoned explanation that uses evidence and logical reasoning to support the validity of the picture's claim.

2. How is the logical argument for the picture's claim different from other arguments?

The logical argument for the picture's claim is different from other arguments because it relies on logical reasoning and evidence rather than emotional appeals or personal opinions.

3. What are the key components of a logical argument?

The key components of a logical argument include a claim or statement, evidence to support the claim, logical reasoning to connect the evidence to the claim, and a conclusion that follows logically from the evidence and reasoning.

4. Why is the logical argument important in scientific research?

The logical argument is important in scientific research because it allows scientists to present their findings and support their claims in a clear, structured, and unbiased manner. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the research.

5. Can a logical argument be used to prove a claim?

No, a logical argument cannot be used to prove a claim. Instead, it can provide strong evidence and reasoning to support a claim, but the claim itself must still be open to further investigation and testing.

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
410
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Views
603
  • General Discussion
Replies
9
Views
952
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
23
Views
975
  • General Discussion
Replies
7
Views
526
  • General Discussion
Replies
28
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • General Discussion
Replies
7
Views
1K
Back
Top