Critical Thinking is important!

Hmm, I’m trying to think about it, but it’s 2 am..hmm. If you turn over the obvious (A) then you can’t prove that it was the A that you turned over because all you’d see is the 6 and then D. I’d go with the opposite, turn over the D and then see the three, hold it so you can see both at the same time and then, poof you have you’d have the proof. wow, sorry if that made no sense…LOL HAGD!

whoa there, you have 4 cards, and you can see each one is labeled with one of the following “A” “D” “3” “6” – and you cannot see the other side of those 4 cards. Which do you turn over to prove the rule true?

Oh, duh, I’m retarded. Ugh, need sleep, good one, though, I’ll think about it, harder…lol… Dumb me, now I feel stupid, ha ha.

Of those four cards and given that you can only turn one over, the A is the only one that speaks to the rule. Constenents aren’t proihibited from having even numbers. Seeing how it’s not a stated rule that you can only turn one over, though, turn them all over and the rest of the cards in the deck.

We can’t prove it, you only gave me two cards. If you gave me forty cards, maybe we could figure it out. I dont think the real problem is which to turn over, I think the problem is that I dont have enough evidence. Aaaand… like an aobve noter, it’s two in the morning.

If four cards is all there is to the deck, you’d have to turn over the A and the three. And I disagree with the above noter. In a game such as chess or spades the rules apply only to the context of the game, for instance you can’t not play spades because 52 cards don’t give you enough evidence, nor can you play pinnocle with a spades deck. In the context of the game all the evidence you need

Is available. If the question is asking is the rule universally true for every card available it’s not really a game so much as a set up. e.g. the rules of twister state that you need to do what the spinner says while playing the game, you aren’t expected to do what it says outside the confines of the game.

haredawg’s right as far as the confines of the game. 1. You are allowed to turn over more than one card. 2. The point is which cards to flip that are necessary to prove the rule? 3. You are considering only these 4 cards that are in front of you, don’t worry about any other cards.

Sorry, here’s the why to adding the three into the proof. If there is a vowel on the other side the rule is wrong. It doesn’t matter whats on the other side of the D and Six, because, again, constenents aren’t prohibited from having even numbers nor even limited to numbers, they can, by the singular rule, have pictures of cows or the number six on them.

ahh…confirmation bias.

Turn over the A, D, and 3. If there’s a vowel on the other side of either the D or 3, the rule is wrong. If there’s not an odd number on the other side of the A, the rule is wrong. Who cares what’s on the other side of the 6, it wouldn’t disprove the rule either way, if it’s a vowel the rule is supported, if it’s not a vowel, it doesn’t relate to the rule.

^– Should be “if there’s not an *even* number on the other side of the A…”

I thought about adding D but I also thought about the assumption inherent in the question and the same assumption I believe the author made, that all cards had a letter on one side and a number on the other. I mentioned a picture of a cow to suggest the assumption is necessaryily made. But, like a test in school, one anticipates the authors assumptions and discusses the fallacys after the test.

^^^ That should be tghe assumption is not neccessarily made.

Jesus my keyboard is possessed. Too many ashes and scotch.

“I also thought about the assumption inherent in the question and the same assumption I believe the author made, that all cards had a letter on one side and a number on the other.” It’s ok to assume something, I think, but you have to state your assumptions, which the author didn’t do. Otherwise, you could assume so many things that the answer is completely different.

You’re right. I didn’t get it until I read. My thinking was off. Apparently, I’m not as logical as I’d like to think some days. 😉

“the same assumption I believe the author made, that all cards had a letter on one side and a number on the other.” I think that the author may have even had that stipulation written in, but it may have been edited out.

With that stipulation then there is no need to flip the D.

Without that stipulation, given anything including nothing be on the back of that D, the probablity of it being a vowel is incredibly low, lower than it being a sign of the zodiac, a poem by Dylan Thomas, a picture from Audobons book. But seeing how there isn’t a stipulation on how many cards you can flip over it’s not really much of a problem — flip everything including the unecessary 6.

My answer of the A and 3 given you can flip more than one card is an indictment of the public school system which teaches you how to test and not imagine cows or vowels where numbers should be.

I posted a similar puzzle 04/19/2001: http://www.opendiary.com/entryview.asp?authorcode=A219369&entry=10122&mode=date His answer would be correct given the additional condition that you know for a fact that there’s always a letter on one side and a number on the other. In other words, if it’s not possible for D to have a vowel on the other side then D does not need to be checked.

That was given as a condition in the puzzle I posted – it makes me wonder whether or not the author meant to include it as well.

On a related topic, I read The Tipping Point at Seminary. I’m not sure how you feel about the book being employed that way, but I enjoyed it.

“I read The Tipping Point at Seminary. I’m not sure how you feel about the book being employed that way, but I enjoyed it.” I understand how and why it would be a tempting book to use in seminary.

If the assumption is that each card has a letter on one side and a number on the other flipping D does absolutely nothing.

oh oops.. already been said multiple times.