15.75
_____SOMETHING NEW
I realized that language and logic aren't particularly best friends. Our normal usage of language allow us to communicate most of the time, efficiently. However, language can be ambiguous. Sometimes we use quantifiers, and they do not necessarily mean what they mean in logical terms.
"THERE IS AT LEAST SOMEONE BORED ENOUGH, OR GETTING PAID, WHO READS MY BLOG"
So, in logical terms this could mean:
16.75) There is at least one person who belongs to the set of "Bored Enough" who reads my blog.
17.75) There is at least one person who belongs to the set of "Getting Paid" who reads my blog.
18.75) And the negation of this, logically, would be that there is no one who is bored enough or is being paid who reads my blog.
20.75) So, look at the following Venn Diagrams:
21.75) Crazy, eh!? There could be someone who reads my blog who is bored enough, and who is getting paid. If you think about it though, you could be somehow being paid for doing something else, and you are bored enough to be reading my blog. However, in the universe of logic, you can be both, and reading my blog.
22.75) In English, the previous statement would mean that that someone reading my blog, yeah, YOU! are reading it ONLY because you are bored enough or because you are getting paid for reading it.
Anyway, listen to the following advice (worth the last 5 'times' of this post):
DO NOT TRANSLATE ENGLISH INTO LOGIC, THINK LOGICALLY!
