@B100J Okay, the puzzle is logically correct. The explanation given by @PhilosophyExp, isn't. And I didn't select the yellow, only circle.
@lordpasternack Sorry, but I just don't know what you're talking about. As I say, the explanation given is correct. But thanks, anyway! :)
-
-
@PhilosophyExp You should have said "there's no problem even if there's NOT a circle/S on the other side".pic.twitter.com/2pXUvhYpk6
-
@lordpasternack For which cards precisely? -
@PhilosophyExp The first two. Point is we don't make sure yellow goes with circle for same reason we don't make sure over 18s drink alcohol. -
@lordpasternack It does say, No prob even if circle is on other side, which is equivalent to, No prob even if drinking alcohol. -
@PhilosophyExp The point should be stressed that it doesn't matter EITHER WAY what results of that query are. It wouldn't break rule. 2/2 -
@lordpasternack@PhilosophyExp ^exactly. It's designed to deceive, no? Seems clear to me if simply explained correctly would be simple. -
@giggs_boson@lordpasternack Well, the Wason selection task has a standard form. Some people do argue that it is linguistically misleading. -
@PhilosophyExp@giggs_boson I found it misleading in that, if in quality control for card games company, I would just discard "duds". 1/2 - 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@PhilosophyExp I know what you mean now, but it would be better phrased as "we know that this doesn't break the conditions of the rule". 2/2 -
@lordpasternack Ah right. Yes, your phrasing does sound better. :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@PhilosophyExp And "we already know that the rule is upheld" implied to me that you were suggesting you knew what was on other side. 1/2Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.