Will AI lead to a basic minimum wage?

Prove it.
English is an open functional system, so no proof is possible; however:

The word 'evidence' first entered the English lexicon around 1300, stemming from French. It means an appearance from which inferences may be drawn. It is not a proof. It is simply a supporting statement, objects or characters that support a statement (such as a measurement), including any book, magazine, website,etc.

Evidence is not a proof.

A proof is only possible in a closed functional system, such as mathematics or logic.

Perhaps I don't.
You seemed to have used 'evidence' in that way. This is actually a rather common a mistake. It's an easy trap to fall into. Democrats use 'evidence' to mean 'proof' all the time. So do fundamentalists. This is why this misuse of the term is so pervasive.

Democrats also like to deny evidence, but they cannot make it go away or simply disappear. It's still there. Remember that 'evidence' does not mean 'proof', but Democrats typically misuse the term this way.

The related proof in logic:
?A->A (proof of identity)
 
English is an open functional system, so no proof is possible; however:

The word 'evidence' first entered the English lexicon around 1300, stemming from French. It means an appearance from which inferences may be drawn. It is not a proof. It is simply a supporting statement, objects or characters that support a statement (such as a measurement), including any book, magazine, website,etc.

Evidence is not a proof.

A proof is only possible in a closed functional system, such as mathematics or logic.


You seemed to have used 'evidence' in that way. This is actually a rather common a mistake. It's an easy trap to fall into. Democrats use 'evidence' to mean 'proof' all the time. So do fundamentalists. This is why this misuse of the term is so pervasive.

Democrats also like to deny evidence, but they cannot make it go away or simply disappear. It's still there. Remember that 'evidence' does not mean 'proof', but Democrats typically misuse the term this way.

The related proof in logic:
?A->A (proof of identity)

If' I'd said that evidence is not a proof, you'd have a point. Did I?
 
Back
Top