## 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 :-)
Guest Message by DevFuse

# Honestants and Swindlecants V.

32 replies to this topic

### #31 nestor

nestor

Newbie

• Members
• 1 posts

Posted 22 April 2008 - 03:36 PM

"If my wife is an Honestant, then I am Swindlecant."

Spoiler for Just to illustrate AN approach:

• 0

### #32 afw27

afw27

Newbie

• Members
• 2 posts

Posted 21 July 2008 - 04:20 AM

I am still questioning why one can not observe this as a simple comparison (Night : Day :: Dark : Light) He may simply be stating that IF his wife were a Honestant he would be a Swindlecant. Therefore stating that in the realms of logic he could be a Swindlecant, or could be a Honestant. It was said that they always told the truth or always told a lie, but never stated that either one would not be able to make a simple paradoxical statement.

A = The wife exists
B = the wife is Honestant
C = the speaker exists
D = the speaker is Swindlecant

I love the variable about the wife or speaker existing. (Esp. the speaker!)
• 0

### #33 SKULLOK

SKULLOK

Newbie

• Members
• 6 posts

Posted 21 April 2009 - 05:39 AM

I am still questioning why one can not observe this as a simple comparison (Night : Day :: Dark : Light) He may simply be stating that IF his wife were a Honestant he would be a Swindlecant. Therefore stating that in the realms of logic he could be a Swindlecant, or could be a Honestant. It was said that they always told the truth or always told a lie, but never stated that either one would not be able to make a simple paradoxical statement.

I love the variable about the wife or speaker existing. (Esp. the speaker!)

A paradox is neither a truth, nor a lie. It is simply an impossibility. If one is only capable of telling the truth, then they cannot speak a paradox. Only one capable of lying could speak a paradox.
Look at it like this. If you're telling the truth, saying something that is impossible would not be telling the truth.

The simple fact is, that this particular one has two answers:

Either A: they are both swindlecants (as it is one sentance, and as such, one statement, meaning that if part of it is false, the whole statement is false)

Or B: His wife is a swindlecant, and he is an honestant, because he is stating that if he were to say that his wife were an honestant, that he would have to be a swindlecant as he would be lying.
• 0

#### 0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users