Simple Logic Quiz

[Desert Reign]

I'll post a link to this one if anyone solves it.

Three gods A, B, and C are called, in no particular order, True, False, and Random. True always speaks truly, False always speaks falsely, but whether Random speaks truly or falsely is a completely random matter. Your task is to determine the identities of A, B, and C by asking three yes-no questions; each question must be put to exactly one god. The gods understand English, but will answer all questions in their own language, in which the words for yes and no are da and ja, in some order. You do not know which word means which.

Edit: Actually, this is much too hard. If anyone here solves it in the space of a month without help, they need counselling to help cope with being one of only half a dozen people in the world at their level. I only posted it for academic interest. In my view, though, the answer is a thing of beauty.

 

[Desert Reign]

Okay, choose two boxes.

E and 4
the other two are irellevant since they're neither even or a vowel.

But they're rectangles!

Being palindromic isn't an excuse for being late!

 

[patrick jane]

Okay, choose two boxes.

E and 4
the other two are irellevant since they're neither even or a vowel.

But they're rectangles!

i thought something similar - about 50 posts ago !

it's wrong

 

[Dan Emanuel]

I'll post a link to this one if anyone solves it.
Edit: Actually, this is much too hard. If anyone here solves it in the space of a month without help, they need counselling to help cope with being one of only half a dozen people in the world at their level. I only posted it for academic interest. In my view, though, the answer is a thing of beauty.

From wiki: " . . . a single god may be asked more than one question . . . "


DJ

1.0
​

 

[genuineoriginal]

E

4

7

K

Which two boxes would you choose to test this rule: If a box shows a vowel on one side, then it has an even number on the other side.

Which two?

Are the letters and numbers displayed supposed to be on the inside of the box or on the outside of the box?

 

[PureX]

The answer is any/none. None of these boxes will test the rule, conclusively, and any of them will test the rule inconclusively.

 

[genuineoriginal]

The answer is any/none. None of these boxes will test the rule, conclusively, and any of them will test the rule inconclusively.

The box with 4 cannot be used, since there is nothing in the rule stating that a number must have a vowel on the other side.

The box with K cannot be used, since there is nothing in the rule about consonants.

So, the only two boxes that are of any use are the box with the E and the box with the 7, but they are not much good unless one or both of them prove the rule is false.

The box with the E could have an even number on the other side, showing it is complying with the rule but not proving that the rule is true, or it could have something other than an even number, proving that the rule is not true.

The box with the 7 could have a vowel on the other side, proving that the rule is not true, or it could have something other than a vowel, which would prove nothing.

 

[PureX]

The box with 4 cannot be used, since there is nothing in the rule stating that a number must have a vowel on the other side.

The box with K cannot be used, since there is nothing in the rule about consonants.

So, the only two boxes that are of any use are the box with the E and the box with the 7, but they are not much good unless one or both of them prove the rule is false.

The box with the E could have an even number on the other side, showing it is complying with the rule but not proving that the rule is true, or it could have something other than an even number, proving that the rule is not true.

The box with the 7 could have a vowel on the other side, proving that the rule is not true, or it could have something other than a vowel, which would prove nothing.

But the question is about testing the rule. I think you're supposing that the rule is true.

Any of the boxes can be used to "test" the rule, because any box can either prove or disprove the rule. But none of them can do so conclusively because we don't have enough information in any of the boxes.

 

[genuineoriginal]

But the question is about testing the rule. I think you're supposing that the rule is true.

Any of the boxes can be used to "test" the rule, because any box can either prove or disprove the rule.

Only two boxes can be used to disprove the rule, but none of the boxes can be used to prove the rule.

 

[PureX]

Only two boxes can be used to disprove the rule, but none of the boxes can be used to prove the rule.

None of the boxes can be used to prove or disprove anything, because the boxes don't contain enough information to do that. The two boxes with the consonant and the odd number could be used to disprove the rule if they were coupled with a vowel and an even number, respectively. Just as the other two boxes could be used to prove the rule by coupling them with the proper respective vowel and even number.

But they aren't, so they can't prove anything.

 

[quip]

The answer is any/none. None of these boxes will test the rule, conclusively, and any of them will test the rule inconclusively.

How so?

There are only four cards. Either the E or the 7 will respectively have and even number/vowel under them or not....conclusively validating/invalidating the rule.

The 4 and the K don't matter. It is explained here.

 

[PureX]

How so?

There are only four cards. Either the E or the 7 will respectively have and even number/vowel under them or not....conclusively validating/invalidating the rule.

The 4 and the K don't matter. It is explained here.

None of them matter, because none of them present the other letter/number needed to validate or invalidate the 'rule'. The quest is self-contradictory. We're being asked apply logic to presumptions that aren't ever going to manifest. And that's an illogical request.

 

[quip]

None of them matter, because none of them present the other letter/number needed to validate or invalidate the 'rule'. The quest is self-contradictory. We're being asked apply logic to presumptions that aren't ever going to manifest. And that's an illogical request.

What unmaifested presumptions?

Remember we're validating a rule not a law. Within this four card setting either the E will show an odd or even number and the 7 will show a vowel or consonant, effectively demonstrating validation or not.

 

[PureX]

What unmaifested presumptions?

Remember we're validating a rule not a law. Within this four card setting either the E will show an odd or even number and the 7 will show a vowel or consonant, effectively demonstrating validation or not.

Or there will be pictures of flowers and lighthouses opposite all four (cards, boxes, whatever).

The question demands that we presume information that isn't being given. And that's where it becomes inherently illogical. It is illogical to presume information that we don't have. The logical thing to do is to accept that we are missing the information needed to validate or invalidate the rule being proposed, and either seek out the information necessary, or reject the question. Since there is no apparent way to seek out the information necessary, given this scenario, I reject the question.

 

[patrick jane]

Or there will be pictures of flowers and lighthouses opposite all four (cards, boxes, whatever).

The question demands that we presume information that isn't being given. And that's where it becomes inherently illogical. It is illogical to presume information that we don't have. The logical thing to do is to accept that we are missing the information needed to validate or invalidate the rule being proposed, and either seek out the information necessary, or reject the question. Since there is no apparent way to seek out the information necessary, given this scenario, I reject the question.

me too - cuz i was wrong :chuckle:

 

[annabenedetti]

What unmaifested presumptions?

Remember we're validating a rule not a law. Within this four card setting either the E will show an odd or even number and the 7 will show a vowel or consonant, effectively demonstrating validation or not.

Whatever you do, don't tell PureX

Spoiler

you have three doors.

 

[quip]

Or there will be pictures of flowers and lighthouses opposite all four (cards, boxes, whatever).

Sure, but so what? Either of the shown sides could also show flowers and lighthouses...in either case the intended premise for the very exercise would be removed and thus rendered pointless. Your objection is redundant.

The question demands that we presume information that isn't being given. And that's where it becomes inherently illogical. It is illogical to presume information that we don't have.

No. Rather it's intentionally set-out to employ logic using the partial information given to reach an informative conclusion.

 

[Poly]

The answer is....

Yes.

 

[PureX]

Sure, but so what? Either of the shown sides could also show flowers and lighthouses...in either case the intended premise for the very exercise would be removed and thus rendered pointless. Your objection is redundant.

And your question was logically incoherent. So there you have it: asked and … responded to.

No. Rather it's intentionally set-out to employ logic using the partial information given to reach an informative conclusion.

And that's logically impossible. Thus the question negates it's own intent. It renders itself a pointless exercise. A "trick" question with no payoff.

There's logic, and there's reason. This logic is unreasonable.

 

[Ktoyou]

e and 4

i know my answer was right so this thread is OVER -

now if you change one word or letter from the OP, then you changed it -
and the whole thread is invalid -

Why would that be?:chew: