Listen

[Answer]

In mathematics there's something called propositional logic. It's basically a structured way of looking at the validity of an argument.

The idea is to have two propositions, p and q. For example we could say

p - It has rained recently
q - the grass is wet

What we want to prove is that IF it has rained recently, then that means without a doubt, the grass will be wet. That's the only way P implies Q can be proven as an argument.

Let us look at all the possibilities of P and Q:

It has rained recently and the grass is wet
It has rained recently and the grass is not wet
It has not rained recently and the grass is wet
It has not rained recently and the grass is not wet

If it has rained recently and the grass is wet, that's ok for our argument.
This is P implies Q. It shows that our argument holds

If it has rained recently and the grass is not wet this debunks the argument
This is P implies not Q and shows the argument does not hold.

If it has not rained recently and the grass is wet. This is ok for our argument
This is not P implies Q. This one may be a bit more confusing, but in mathematics this is said to be "vacuously" true. It doesn't prove or disprove the argument, because the grass could be wet for a number of other reasons. Maybe someone turned on some sprinklers. It doesn't disprove the argument that rain will cause the grass to be wet. Don't worry if that doesn't make sense, it's not super relevant here.

If It has not rained recently and the grass is not wet this is also ok for our argument
This is not P implies not Q which is still consistent with our argument, because if the grass is dry and it hasn't rained recently, there's no reason to think the ground won't eventually become wet once it rains

When you say "I had to dumb my shit down" what you seem to be implying is that dumbing down will make you successful on this site. This uses the same P implies Q logic that we've just talked about

P - I dumbed down my writing style
Q - I will be successful on this site

Per your own admission of "dumbing down", this means what you've experienced sinced you've gotten here is a P implies not Q.

You're saying that you have dumbed down your style, therefore P is true, but we all know you've not been successful on this site, which means we have not Q.

That's part of why you're, understandably, frustrated. You've been struggling to establish yourself as anything other than a mid-tier writer at a time when only a handful of NC's top-tier writers are still active, AND at a time when a large portion of active voters are not even NC natives. If anything, this is the easiest time in NC history for you to come over and champ literally anything.

This P implies Not Q is in fact, it's the only one of the above scenarios that debunks the argument entirely. So your insistence that dumbing down your style will make you successful on this site has been proven false

so mathematically speaking, you just need to write better

[~RustyGunZ~]

Originally Posted by Answer

In mathematics there's something called propositional logic. It's basically a structured way of looking at the validity of an argument.

The idea is to have two propositions, p and q. For example we could say

p - It has rained recently
q - the grass is wet

What we want to prove is that IF it has rained recently, then that means without a doubt, the grass will be wet. That's the only way P implies Q can be proven as an argument.

Let us look at all the possibilities of P and Q:

It has rained recently and the grass is wet
It has rained recently and the grass is not wet
It has not rained recently and the grass is wet
It has not rained recently and the grass is not wet

If it has rained recently and the grass is wet, that's ok for our argument.
This is P implies Q. It shows that our argument holds

If it has rained recently and the grass is not wet this debunks the argument
This is P implies not Q and shows the argument does not hold.

If it has not rained recently and the grass is wet. This is ok for our argument
This is not P implies Q. This one may be a bit more confusing, but in mathematics this is said to be "vacuously" true. It doesn't prove or disprove the argument, because the grass could be wet for a number of other reasons. Maybe someone turned on some sprinklers. It doesn't disprove the argument that rain will cause the grass to be wet. Don't worry if that doesn't make sense, it's not super relevant here.

If It has not rained recently and the grass is not wet this is also ok for our argument
This is not P implies not Q which is still consistent with our argument, because if the grass is dry and it hasn't rained recently, there's no reason to think the ground won't eventually become wet once it rains

When you say "I had to dumb my shit down" what you seem to be implying is that dumbing down will make you successful on this site. This uses the same P implies Q logic that we've just talked about

P - I dumbed down my writing style
Q - I will be successful on this site

Per your own admission of "dumbing down", this means what you've experienced sinced you've gotten here is a P implies not Q.

You're saying that you have dumbed down your style, therefore P is true, but we all know you've not been successful on this site, which means we have not Q.

That's part of why you're, understandably, frustrated. You've been struggling to establish yourself as anything other than a mid-tier writer at a time when only a handful of NC's top-tier writers are still active, AND at a time when a large portion of active voters are not even NC natives. If anything, this is the easiest time in NC history for you to come over and champ literally anything.

This P implies Not Q is in fact, it's the only one of the above scenarios that debunks the argument entirely. So your insistence that dumbing down your style will make you successful on this site has been proven false

so mathematically speaking, you just need to write better

Beautifully said

[JaysonFresh]

Originally Posted by Answer

In mathematics there's something called propositional logic. It's basically a structured way of looking at the validity of an argument.

The idea is to have two propositions, p and q. For example we could say

p - It has rained recently
q - the grass is wet

What we want to prove is that IF it has rained recently, then that means without a doubt, the grass will be wet. That's the only way P implies Q can be proven as an argument.

Let us look at all the possibilities of P and Q:

It has rained recently and the grass is wet
It has rained recently and the grass is not wet
It has not rained recently and the grass is wet
It has not rained recently and the grass is not wet

If it has rained recently and the grass is wet, that's ok for our argument.
This is P implies Q. It shows that our argument holds

If it has rained recently and the grass is not wet this debunks the argument
This is P implies not Q and shows the argument does not hold.

If it has not rained recently and the grass is wet. This is ok for our argument
This is not P implies Q. This one may be a bit more confusing, but in mathematics this is said to be "vacuously" true. It doesn't prove or disprove the argument, because the grass could be wet for a number of other reasons. Maybe someone turned on some sprinklers. It doesn't disprove the argument that rain will cause the grass to be wet. Don't worry if that doesn't make sense, it's not super relevant here.

If It has not rained recently and the grass is not wet this is also ok for our argument
This is not P implies not Q which is still consistent with our argument, because if the grass is dry and it hasn't rained recently, there's no reason to think the ground won't eventually become wet once it rains

When you say "I had to dumb my shit down" what you seem to be implying is that dumbing down will make you successful on this site. This uses the same P implies Q logic that we've just talked about

P - I dumbed down my writing style
Q - I will be successful on this site

Per your own admission of "dumbing down", this means what you've experienced sinced you've gotten here is a P implies not Q.

You're saying that you have dumbed down your style, therefore P is true, but we all know you've not been successful on this site, which means we have not Q.

That's part of why you're, understandably, frustrated. You've been struggling to establish yourself as anything other than a mid-tier writer at a time when only a handful of NC's top-tier writers are still active, AND at a time when a large portion of active voters are not even NC natives. If anything, this is the easiest time in NC history for you to come over and champ literally anything.

This P implies Not Q is in fact, it's the only one of the above scenarios that debunks the argument entirely. So your insistence that dumbing down your style will make you successful on this site has been proven false

so mathematically speaking, you just need to write better

lmao. can we sticky this somewhere?