Probability logic

[MemeFan]

I'm using just these posts as example:

I think that these “leaders” are into the whole reduction of population for the sake of the globe thing.
They have no concern about lives and WWWIII is not at all inconvenient as part of the process. Destruction of the environment in the process is also not a problem. But they are happy to shut down food production if it inconveniences an obscure species, the only goal is to control and reduce the human species.

Problem is that these leaders want to stay on top of society after war. If they can't, then their sacrifice is useless.

We have been taught in logic these is induction and deduction. Horewer, there are other ways of thinking.

While in deduction/induction we can start we true premises, we can also start with assumed premises. If there is high chance assumed premise is true, then conclusion must also be.

So in @steve's post his premise is that ruling elite wants population reduction. So logically it follows that WW3 would help them achieve their goal.

So why world isn't already nuked? Well, because there are hidden requirements which aren't talked/mentioned.

My post mentions one such requirement: staying in power. Do I have proof? None. I have assumed they like their current position.

There is possibility elite actually believes nuking world would create global bliss and ascension. What is probability of such action? Close to zero. So we can disregard it.

We can assume additional hidden requirements: wanting to preserve current control systems with possible tehnical upgrades, no new control system which weaken existing ones, being blameless for war, making themselves victims for war start etc......

Good usage of such logic would help us understand world and make our understanding more sensible.

For example, I remember @MeganC writing how Putin is crazy for treating NATO with nukes. Trully? What is better explanation? Crazy Putin or Putin threathening to nuke societal control systems with warmonger's villas included?

 

[MeganC]

For example, I remember @MeganC writing how Putin is crazy for treating NATO with nukes. Trully? What is better explanation? Crazy Putin or Putin threathening to nuke societal control systems with warmonger's villas included?