- ‘H' = "humanity’s survival"
- 'P' = "problem solving”
- 'D' = "statistical diversity”

1. Assume H is good
2. Assume D increases the chance of P
3. Assume P is necessary for H
4. Therefore, it can be inferred that D is necessary for likelihood of H

diversity is necessary for survival.

Interesting framework. I agree.

Where does "1. Assume H is good" fit into the equation? It doesn't seem to have any influence on the rest of the variables.

Operator turned investor. Work in TradFi. Exploring the future of social investing @crossroads.  🟪

great question. that comes into play on the second cast with "therefore diversity is good." a truly good logical argument should be a lot longer than this with many more premises.

Hmm.

I wrestle with the broad applicability of that assumption. For example, I imagine most would agree Hitler negates this statement. 

Therefore a more nuanced assumption might be: "most of humanity wants to be good, most of the time".

Need to give more thought to what that would mean for the proof.

Or is it that humanity's survival is good, and not that humanity itself is inherently good?

right, humanity's survival being good is the first assumption. I agree that humanity itself has many examples of doing things counter to that throughout history.