Kenneth Drew Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 not exactly correct. depending on what is revealed on the other side, turning certain other(s) can tell you something. this is the problem, in fact - finding what you can learn from turning a card (asking the right question). and not reading the question correctly is probably the single biggest mistake made, i'm seeing. and not reading the question correctly is probably the single biggest mistake made, i'm seeing. I'm gonna bet that 'not stating the question correctly' is going to be the biggest mistake made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 the key is understanding EXACTLY what this means: If a card has a vowel on one side, then it has an even number on the other side. a lot like understanding exactly and ONLY what three empty shells on the floor means... unless someone has a direct question, I'll stay out of this for now. if someone hits the right answer, or doesn't, i'll leave it to discussion. i like seeing how people think - this doesn't mean that one way of thinking is right and another wrong - one way may lead to the correct conclusion more easily than another - and one way may lead AWAY from the correct answer, (which is not a 'right' way of thinking if fact is what's sought, i guess). John Dolva's explanation is what's so neat about this... If a card has a vowel on one side, then it has an even number on the other side. If this is stated correctly, then you do not get to see what is on the other side of a card unless you see that it has a vowel on the side you are looking at . If a vowel, then you can look. No vowel, no lookee. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 hmmm... ahh but which is one side and which is the other? the one side that you can see is E K 4 7. you can't look at the 'other' unless you see a vowel. If a vowel, then..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 you're reading way too much into this. let me try to say this without giving up the answer. you may not like it, but you're not an idiot and if you have not answered the problem then perhaps there IS a challenge to it, and i'm hoping that at least some OTHERS will find the fun in it. OK - there IS NO twist. it's the common error this doctor says many people make in jumping to an errant conclusion from a given set of circumstances. the statement is: If a card has a vowel on one side, then it has an even number on the other side. If a vowel is visible on a side of the card, then the rule states that an EVEN number will be found on the other side of the card when it's turned over. it does NOT say "If a vowel is seen on a card 'then you can see if'" anything... The premise is: EVEN NUMBERS will ALWAYS be found on the other side of a VOWEL. that's all it says. NOW read the challenge... See, I told you that you were changing it in the middle of answering. First this is the statement: 'If a card has a vowel on one side, then it has an even number on the other side.' and you have now changed that to: "EVEN NUMBERS will ALWAYS be found on the other side of a VOWEL." That doesn't even come close to being the same thing. See that first sentence If it has .... then it has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 (edited) Yeah, I tend to agree. I don't know if I'm overthinking it when suggesting a card has two "one side"s, both of which have an other side. Either way, to validate the statement, if E has an even number on 'the other side" the statement is validatet irrespectively of whether any other card does or does not validate it. edit : typo add : even if E does not validate the statement, the statement is not invalid. Another card may or may not do so. ioiw. No card. 0. Minimum. Edited August 12, 2015 by John Dolva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 so, right - if you turn E over and behold there's a VOWEL, so far the statement is true... and that does not solve the problem... I don't think you meant that did you? turn an E over and there is a vowel. 2 vowels on one card. I thought vowels had even numbers on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 This is an awesome puzzle. My answer is that you have to turn over everything but the 4. Some people are making the assumption that each card must have a letter on one side and a number on the other. That's not a given. The "K" could have a vowel on the other side. It's irrelevant what's on the other side of the 4 because if it's a vowel it confirms the proposition but if it's not it doesn't violate the proposition. You only need to look for falsifying evidence . The "K" could have a vowel on the other side. No it can't. Vowels have even numbers on the back side, not other letters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted August 12, 2015 Share Posted August 12, 2015 one thing i've tried to do is write a replica of this test using variables available from the JFK files. it's not easy. "You are shown a set of four cards placed on a table, each of which has a number on one side and a colored patch on the other side. The visible faces of the cards show 3, 8, red and brown. Which card(s) must you turn over in order to test the truth of the proposition that if a card shows an even number on one face, then its opposite face is red?" this is just a variant of the numbers and letters. it does state here, in fact, that each card will be one side alpha and the other numeric, as I think Robert decided, but i don't see as how that makes a difference in arriving at the solution (which has already been found in this thread, by the way). to JFK: A set of givens (what we know): LHO was seen on 6 of TSBD a rifle registered to LHO was found on 6 the day the pres was shot. bullets SHELLS matching the RIFLE were found on the floor of 6. LHO left TSBD soon after the shooting i tried to arrange these or something like these into a similar if then statement so as to THEN seek a LOGICAL conclusion of some kind or another. for instance: IF LHO was seen on 6 and the RIFLE was found on 6, THEN ... see, it's hard to establish a truth, since we are in fact working with a real case and real facts... how about: IF the SHELLS found on 6 match the RIFLE found on 6, THEN it is established that the SHELLS were FIRED in that RIFLE (now, technically one does not prove the next, so this works just like the RULE IF a VOWEL, then an EVEN number. it's given to us, so we can go with the SHELLS WERE FIRED from the RIFLE). and the puzzle: WHAT has to be shown to prove that LHO did or did NOT fire that RIFLE on that day...? i don't think that works too well as a replica of this puzzle, but it's good exercise thinking of these facets in these terms... A set of givens that we know: LHO was seen on 6 of TSBD a rifle registered to LHO was found on 6 the day the pres was shot. bullets SHELLS matching the RIFLE were found on the floor of 6. LHO left TSBD soon after the shooting I have never seen it proven that LHO had a rifle registered to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted August 12, 2015 Author Share Posted August 12, 2015 Robert, sometimes we condition ourselves to try to answer the question that wasn't asked. It's a big part of being human. We all do it from time to time. Sometimes we need to slow down and ask ourselves, "Exactly what IS the question asking?" I know that defense attorneys prefer that their clients and their witnesses confine their answers to the questions that are specifically asked. So sometimes the logic train jumps the rails when we try to answer more than we can possibly know from the data we have. [A certain Walker-did-it theory comes to mind here.] right, or even "if there are shells on the ground and the nearby gun is registered to Lee, then Lee fired the gun." a person is thinking, "he very probably fired the gun," and in most cases very probably works, but it is NOT "proven to the exclusion of all other possibilities that Lee fired the gun," and in something like a murder case, these two differences are as different as night and day. I'm surprised you haven't gotten the answer yet, Mark. but I haven't read the rest of the thread. i'm torn between providing the answer and the links to the tests, or throwing in some wrenches... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted August 12, 2015 Author Share Posted August 12, 2015 one thing i've tried to do is write a replica of this test using variables available from the JFK files. it's not easy. "You are shown a set of four cards placed on a table, each of which has a number on one side and a colored patch on the other side. The visible faces of the cards show 3, 8, red and brown. Which card(s) must you turn over in order to test the truth of the proposition that if a card shows an even number on one face, then its opposite face is red?" this is just a variant of the numbers and letters. it does state here, in fact, that each card will be one side alpha and the other numeric, as I think Robert decided, but i don't see as how that makes a difference in arriving at the solution (which has already been found in this thread, by the way). to JFK: A set of givens (what we know): LHO was seen on 6 of TSBD a rifle registered to LHO was found on 6 the day the pres was shot. bullets SHELLS matching the RIFLE were found on the floor of 6. LHO left TSBD soon after the shooting i tried to arrange these or something like these into a similar if then statement so as to THEN seek a LOGICAL conclusion of some kind or another. for instance: IF LHO was seen on 6 and the RIFLE was found on 6, THEN ... see, it's hard to establish a truth, since we are in fact working with a real case and real facts... how about: IF the SHELLS found on 6 match the RIFLE found on 6, THEN it is established that the SHELLS were FIRED in that RIFLE (now, technically one does not prove the next, so this works just like the RULE IF a VOWEL, then an EVEN number. it's given to us, so we can go with the SHELLS WERE FIRED from the RIFLE). and the puzzle: WHAT has to be shown to prove that LHO did or did NOT fire that RIFLE on that day...? i don't think that works too well as a replica of this puzzle, but it's good exercise thinking of these facets in these terms... A set of givens that we know: LHO was seen on 6 of TSBD a rifle registered to LHO was found on 6 the day the pres was shot. bullets SHELLS matching the RIFLE were found on the floor of 6. LHO left TSBD soon after the shooting I have never seen it proven that LHO had a rifle registered to him. that's right, technically. my assumption has been that it was registered in his name in formality only - but they didn't register rifles to persons' names back then, i don't think. so i was simplifying the terms for the sake of the exercise; it was assumed by "them" that the rifle was LHO's because it came to his mailbox. but, as you're pointing out, even if that were a logical conclusion, it doesn't show at all that he took the gun to work, or fired it, etc. which is part of the terms in that it's either a false assumption or a true one. In other words, i threw it in there for people to have to think about before they can leap to LHO firing the gun. this is how DVP and others are saying that it's obvious he did the shooting, because he takes a small given and makes it bigger than it is (and he/they doesn't/don't realize it) LHO was seen on 6 of TSBD - yes, but so what? a rifle registered to LHO was found on 6 the day the pres was shot. - yes, but so what?, or - maybe, but so what? bullets SHELLS matching the RIFLE were found on the floor of 6 - yes, but so what? LHO left TSBD soon after the shooting - yes, but so what? these are really not that good - this is really why i was trying to get someone to help come up with a better set of conditions with which this exercise can be seen realistically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted August 12, 2015 Author Share Posted August 12, 2015 This is an awesome puzzle. My answer is that you have to turn over everything but the 4. Some people are making the assumption that each card must have a letter on one side and a number on the other. That's not a given. The "K" could have a vowel on the other side. It's irrelevant what's on the other side of the 4 because if it's a vowel it confirms the proposition but if it's not it doesn't violate the proposition. You only need to look for falsifying evidence . The "K" could have a vowel on the other side. No it can't. Vowels have even numbers on the back side, not other letters. this is one of the errors that some people are making, and the point of the exercise: Vowels have even numbers on the back side, not other letters. the condition is simply this: if it's a vowel, then the other side is an even number. and nothing else. there is nothing that states, or implies, that: consonants cannot have an even number, or another consonant, or an odd number, or a naked - goat - on the other side. there is nothing that states, or implies, that: a person cannot turn over any card unless it shows X or until the "if" is satisfied. turning E over does one of two things: it proves the statement TRUE - SO FAR - if the other side is an EVEN #, --- OR --- it proves it false right away if there is NOT an EVEN number there. the mission is to prove the statement true or false with the least amount of turns with the given set of cards. so if you turn E and there's a 2, -> so far, the statement is true. if you turn K, then you have to ask yourself what is proven under the ensuing situation. if there's a 3, then what? if there's a 4, then what? if there's a Z, then what? if there's a nude goat, then what? so is it necessary to turn K? and so on and so forth... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted August 12, 2015 Author Share Posted August 12, 2015 not exactly correct. depending on what is revealed on the other side, turning certain other(s) can tell you something. this is the problem, in fact - finding what you can learn from turning a card (asking the right question). and not reading the question correctly is probably the single biggest mistake made, i'm seeing. and not reading the question correctly is probably the single biggest mistake made, i'm seeing. I'm gonna bet that 'not stating the question correctly' is going to be the biggest mistake made. as i've said about FIVE times, Ken. i used the technology within my brand new Windows 10 to perform a COPY of the original text as is available on the website from whence this test came, and used the same technology to perform a PASTE function into the POST i created. This has the result of taking each letter of the original text and transferring it, in order, to the new document so that it, in all intents and purposes, save for some protons, probably, is identical to the original. I have been programming in multiple computer languages for about 12 years. People pay me to do this for them. one of the first things I learned, out of the womb, pretty much, was the art of copy and paste without screwing up the objects that i was wanting to move. My MOTHER can even copy and paste, and she can't even feed herself. (not strictly true, sorry mom). what diction and grammar is presented with the said question would have been the choice of its author. not mine. if, unlike the rest of the people who are gladly and harmoniously participating in this exercise, you feel that the question is trickery or otherwise poorly worded, bitch to the doctors who wrote it. I'll send you the links to their websites in a PM if you feel that it will help you arrive at the answer any better. would you like me to send the link to you? everyone else seems to be engaging and learning in this thing, and i don't want to cut it off by posting the answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted August 12, 2015 Author Share Posted August 12, 2015 John Dolva. There are 2 cards that can immediately DISprove the statement. The 2 are not the 2 you mention. I think, respectfully, you are overthinking the original statement. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that Glenn has told us not to overthink, nor read too much into the problem. well put. good hint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted August 12, 2015 Author Share Posted August 12, 2015 some study material, with which you can get closer to the answer or blow your minds with heavy traffic. http://www.top-law-schools.com/conditional-reasoning.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted August 12, 2015 Author Share Posted August 12, 2015 the key is understanding EXACTLY what this means: If a card has a vowel on one side, then it has an even number on the other side. a lot like understanding exactly and ONLY what three empty shells on the floor means... unless someone has a direct question, I'll stay out of this for now. if someone hits the right answer, or doesn't, i'll leave it to discussion. i like seeing how people think - this doesn't mean that one way of thinking is right and another wrong - one way may lead to the correct conclusion more easily than another - and one way may lead AWAY from the correct answer, (which is not a 'right' way of thinking if fact is what's sought, i guess). John Dolva's explanation is what's so neat about this... If a card has a vowel on one side, then it has an even number on the other side. If this is stated correctly, then you do not get to see what is on the other side of a card unless you see that it has a vowel on the side you are looking at . If a vowel, then you can look. No vowel, no lookee. this is what's so interesting. i'm not trying to be critical, i'm asking to learn and to help... From exactly where do you get this conclusion? "If this is stated correctly, then you do not get to see what is on the other side of a card unless you see that it has a vowel on the side you are looking at..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now