Talons Philosophy

An Open Online Highschool Philosophy Course


Procrastination Leads to Failure

Everyone has a set of unique traits and attributes which makes them who they are. Some people are studious, some are critical thinkers or can work well under pressure. And then there are the people like me. Procrastinators.

  • Premise 1: Procrastinating is intentionally wasting time and deferring tasks which could be completed in now, to a future time period.
  • Premise 2: Tasks must be completed to be considered successful.
  • Premise 3: Tasks or other issues require time to complete.
  • Premise 4: Time is a finite resource.
  • Premise 5: Not having enough time to complete a task leads to failure of said task.
  • Conclusion: Therefore, procrastination causes failure of tasks due to insufficient amounts of time to complete said task.


Premise one can be accepted as true.

Premise two can be more easily debated as to whether it is factually true. Some people may say completion of a task does not mean it was a successful task, as well as the inverse; that completing a task does not mean it was successful. These arguments are made for a variety of reasons, the most important and prevalent one being emotion. Having emotion behind tasks and situations creates a personal bias toward a certain outcome which is not necessarily connected to the completion of the task. For example if someone decided they had a goal of running a marathon but were in the end happy to complete only 50%, they may see the task as a success, even though in the logical setup they failed to complete the entire task. Without emotion or other distractions premise two becomes much easier to accept.

Unless you transcend both time and space to complete your tasks, premise three can be accepted as true

Premise four can be debated on whether or not to be accepted as true for time itself throughout the cosmos and universe but as far as us human beings are concerned, time is a finite resource which we will eventually spend.

Finally premise five, based upon previously accepted premises can also be accepted as true.

This leads us to conclude that based upon the accepted premises, the argument is invalid as the conclusion drawn can be proved false as though we can accept time as being finite, the open-ended nature of procrastination leads us to an infinite amount of potential changes in the use of the time given, some of which would not leave us with enough time to succeed and complete the tasks required (Making the conclusion true) but at the same time there is an infinite amount which would just as easily give us the required time to complete said task (Making the conclusion false). Simply because of the generality of procrastination and the unspecific values of time wasted, remaining and needed, we can not currently conclude that the argument is valid. Of course this also means that the argument is unsound as a result of its invalidity.

So what do we have left? An argument which is neither valid nor sound, while many others would say the factual correctness of the piece is a stretch at best. Procrastinating may not be logically proven to cause failure in this example but let me tell you from personal experience that procrastination is not called the thief of tomorrow for nothing. Many people have felt the engulfing reach of procrastination in their lives, some are improving on their habit, others are begrudgingly accepting it and others… well lets just say some others are up blogging about philosophy assignments much past their finite time given for the task.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *