# Editorialist: Despite the importance it seems to have in our lives, money does not really exist. This is evident fro...

jwperez on January 3, 2020

Can someone walk me through the logic to arrive to A? Thanks!

shunhe on February 1, 2020

Hi @Jonathan,

Thanks for the question! This question requires us to fill in an assumption that will allow the author to logically get to the conclusion from the premises. The author concludes that money does not really exist. Why? Because if we stopped believing in it, it would stop existing. To diagram this, we have:

BM = Believe in Money
ME = Money Exists
P1) ~BM —> ~ME

C) ~ME

We need another premise that helps us get from P1 to C. Let’s take a look at (A). (A) tells us that if something exists and people don’t believe in it anymore, it would still exist. Well, in that case, clearly money doesn’t exist, since if money existed, it would still exist after people stopped believing in it. In other words, to diagram this out:

P2) (ME & ~BM) —> ME

And so then we can conclude that money doesn’t exist, because if people stopped believing in it, it wouldn’t exist. and it’s supposed to exist after people stop believing in it if it exists now. Hope this helps! Please feel free to ask any further questions that you might have.