Multiple Choice: If you choose an answer to this question at random, what is the chance you will be correct?
A) 25%
B) 50%
C) 60%
D) 25%
I went through a few stages on this one, myself.
Wilshire, To be fair...(click to show/hide)
Here's another
A bat and ball cost a dollar and ten cents. The bat costs a dollar more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?
Note: I find this one a bit bogus in how it uses a vague word for a non specific amount right next to a very specific amount. It's like saying 'there were a lot of sheep, 100 of them'.
The question states that you should choose an answer at random. It doesn't state that each option should have an equal probability of being chosen. So you can make any of the options the correct answer by suitably defining the probability of each option being chosen. For example, I could make 60% the correct answer by assigning the following probability distribution to my choice: (A) 40/3% (B) 40/3% (C) 60% (D) 40/3%. ;)
Well, I make no claims about the word "more" being specific or vague because it depends on the context. "The bat costs more than the ball" is vague, but "the bat costs a dollar more than the ball" is specific.Agreed. The only way to make it more specific would be to outright say how much the bat costs, but then there is no question.
Let me turn the question around: how would you rephrase it to make it more precise? I say it's impossible, because it's already as precise as it could be.
I think the trick is that if you read it quick maybe you are supposed to think the bat costs $1? So then you'd falsely assume the ball was 10c and get the answer wrong on the test?Here's another
A bat and ball cost a dollar and ten cents. The bat costs a dollar more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?
Note: I find this one a bit bogus in how it uses a vague word for a non specific amount right next to a very specific amount. It's like saying 'there were a lot of sheep, 100 of them'.
Which bit of this is vague?
The question states that you should choose an answer at random. It doesn't state that each option should have an equal probability of being chosen. So you can make any of the options the correct answer by suitably defining the probability of each option being chosen. For example, I could make 60% the correct answer by assigning the following probability distribution to my choice: (A) 40/3% (B) 40/3% (C) 60% (D) 40/3%. ;)
Yeah I saw this online, but I dont like it (and/or dont get it). Ignoring the choices themselves, it's implied that the probability is 25%. Randomly selecting one of four answers is always 25% unless stated otherwise, because that's how probability works. Assigning whatever values you want doesn't make sense. Flipping a coin give you a 50-50 shot every time. Assigning heads a 75% chance to land up doesn't change the reality that its still 50%.
Let me turn the question around: how would you rephrase it to make it more precise? I say it's impossible, because it's already as precise as it could be.It's not really a question when you insist it is DEFINITELY as precise as it could be.
I'd be interested to see a test run with the 'more' version and a 'the bats cost is one dollar greater in value than the ball's cost is in value' version. I suspect the correct answer turning up more often in the latter.More words do not mean more precise and/or easier to understand. This new way seems more confusing to me than the original, and I don't think its any more or less precise. Granted, without a test that won't ever happen, its just my opinion over yours.
To stop using a singular approximation word for what is not an approximation.
Can you explain how "greater in value" is a better choice than "more"? Or somehow less approximate?
I'll never understand why the specific phrasing is so important to you. I feel like you assume I'm trying to trick you somehow, which I'm not. Wouldn't a generous reading here assume "A" - that I'm merely asking you about your hypothesis? If not, or if I don't deserve a generous reading, could you explain why?QuoteCan you explain how "greater in value" is a better choice than "more"? Or somehow less approximate?
Yes, by running the test.
Otherwise you're blending together A: Merely asking me about my hypothesis/speculation and B: Proving the hypothesis to be the case.
If you want to know more about my hypothesis feel free to ask. But you're phrasing it in a 'IS a better choice?' way right now
. It's an old conversational pattern - either it gives the impression I'm wrong (without having run a test) if I don't engage it
asserting reeeeal hardlol, yes, agreed.
I'll never understand why the specific phrasing is so important to you.How do you know you'll never understand?
I feel like you assume I'm trying to trick you somehow, which I'm not. Wouldn't a generous reading here assume "A" - that I'm merely asking you about your hypothesis?
Do you expect that someone capable of reading this question and doing the math is likely to get tripped up on the word "more" because they don't know its definition or meaning? If so, then do you expect a person who doesn't know the definition of "more" to know the definition of "greater"?
QuoteI feel like you assume I'm trying to trick you somehow, which I'm not. Wouldn't a generous reading here assume "A" - that I'm merely asking you about your hypothesis?
Could you see the A/B distinction before?
I'm just making the conversation clarified and explicit. If we're talking about charitable reading, why take me as seeing a trick?Ah, 'charitable' was the word I was looking for.
To me, at least, language is a train wreck with difficult ground to pick over. I'm not walking awkwardly trying to avoid traps you've laid down, I'm walking awkwardly because of the traps the wreckage makes all by itself. Indeed, the riddle itself is an example of laying down traps without even intending to.Good to know.
Anyway, have you ever done programming? You can often describe in a single sentence what it takes a page or several pages of code to do in a program. Why would that be so if shorter versions describe things in a better way?A small amount. I'm aware of the phenomenon you describe.
QuoteDo you expect that someone capable of reading this question and doing the math is likely to get tripped up on the word "more" because they don't know its definition or meaning? If so, then do you expect a person who doesn't know the definition of "more" to know the definition of "greater"?
Why read it that way? It's simply that 'more value' isn't really accepted English while 'greater value' is.
Anyway, have you ever done programming? You can often describe in a single sentence what it takes a page or several pages of code to do in a program. Why would that be so if shorter versions describe things in a better way?
we are trying to make it "more precise" - which I interpreted as more easily leads the reader to the answer.
I don't know what a perfect clock is. Does that mean that the gears are independent and the gears are infinitely small so that the hand swings perfectly without pause?
Well, I don't do math, but shouldn't this be solvable by graphing the fiction of degrees of the hour hand versus time and the degrees of the minute hand by time?This is another way of doing it. The answers are the same as mine.(click to show/hide)
You know, riddles don't traditionally have an incredibly mathy answer. Indeed that's usually the trap option. Usually they are supposed to be able to be answered by common knowledge - that's what makes them a challenge to everyone and not just a specialist few. It seems odd to me to have one with a very mathy answer
Here's a video - the customer is a bit(?) bitchy but he has a point : https://youtu.be/HFJlgrtpGZY?t=89
I can't say I will never have a dyslexic (or is it dyscalculic?) moment. But the manager saying they definitely recognizes the difference between half a dollar and half a cent, but says they plainly don't recognize a difference between $0.002 and 0.002 cents - that's (waaaait for it!) priceless.