Welcome to BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers Forum
|Welcome to BrainDen.com - Brain Teasers Forum. Like most online communities you must register to post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process. To be a part of BrainDen Forums you may create a new account or sign in if you already have an account.
As a member you could start new topics, reply to others, subscribe to topics/forums to get automatic updates, get your own profile and make new friends.
Of course, you can also enjoy our collection of amazing optical illusions and cool math games.
If you like our site, you may support us by simply clicking Google "+1" or Facebook "Like" buttons at the top.
If you have a website, we would appreciate a little link to BrainDen.
Thanks and enjoy the Den :-)
Honestants and Swindlecants X.
Posted 12 February 2008 - 03:39 PM
If I were to approach the "wantable" woman, and I were a swindlecant, I would say: I'm a woman, and I'm poor. Conversely for Honestants: "I'm a man, and I'm rich."
Posted 03 March 2008 - 04:11 PM
Posted 10 March 2008 - 04:22 PM
This does not work for a swindlecant. By making the first part of the statement a lie he can append anything, truth or fiction and the sentance is still a lie when connected with an and. In other words a poor swindlecant can still legally say this sentence. In order to convince her you would need a statement where both parts have to be false, change the and to an or and then you have it:
"The sun rises in the west OR I am poor".
This way in order for the sentence to be a lie BOTH parts have to be untrue, not just one.
Posted 11 April 2008 - 09:43 AM
"Any Honestant would tell you I am poor."
This is a lie, confirming swindlecant status and rich because it is a lie.
If an Honestant were to say the same thing, they would be telling the truth and therefore be poor, so no wanted.
Posted 02 May 2008 - 04:34 PM
Posted 21 May 2008 - 10:14 AM
Posted 21 May 2008 - 05:18 PM
„I am a poor swindlecant.“ = „I am poor and I am swindlecant.“
Sentence has to be considered as a whole and not as single parts (you would be right if it was 2 separate sentences). For more, check logical conjunction.
Honestants and Swindlecants X. - solution
„I am a poor swindlecant.“ An honestant can not say such a sentence, so it is a lie. And that’s why only a rich swindlecant can say that.
„I am not a poor honestant.“ A swindlecant can not say that, because it would be true. And that’s why an honestant who is not poor (a rich one) said that.
„I am not a poor honestant.“ = I am not poor and I am an honestant. Could a poor swindlecant say this, he is poor = lie he is not an honestant which is a lie, from what I have come to understand F F = F
Also if the man is a rich swindlecant than I am not poor = True I am an honestant = F the whole statement becomes false.
Am I wrong?
Posted 26 August 2008 - 07:45 PM
Posted 14 October 2008 - 09:18 AM
he could still be a poor liar though!
I would think that we are assuming the lady does not know that you are a lier or truth teller, she just believes what she hears. In this case a rich honestant simply sais "I am a rich honestant" and she will take him if she wants a rich honestant. On the other hand if she wanted a rich swindlecat and I happened to be one I might say "I am the only rich swindlecat on this island" which is a lie if there are any others.
I am a lair who is also poor.
a truth teller can never say he is a liar, at all, and a liar can only indicate he is a liar if he lies about something else.
I am not a truth teller who is poor.
a liar can never say he is "not a truth teller" of any ilk, as that would be the truth.
Posted 25 December 2010 - 08:43 AM
If i was a swindlecant, an honestant would say that i am a poor honestant.
If-Then statement, so if the If is false, than the Then is false.
Assuming that, we can say:
If I really am a swindlecant, then I would lie about what an honestant would say about myself: therefore, the girl will think that the honestant is actually saying that I am a rich swindlecant.
If i was a honestant that said this, then the If clause would be false, bringing in the negation of the Then clause:
If I am NOT a swindlecant, an honestant would NOT say that I am a poor honestant; in other words, he would say that I am a rich swindlecant.
In both cases(assuming the girl knows the honestant/swindlecant rules), the girl will think that I am a rich swindlecant, which answers the first problem.
I haven't thought of anything for the second problem yet, so I'll go with the original answer xD
thoughts/corrections? please let this board be alive..
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users