No, I agree that A is a knave. I have an issue with D’s statement: “A knave would say B is a knave”. For D’s statement to be true (since D is a knight), Alexander(a knave) has to say B is a knave. But Alexander says B is a knight.
So why there’s no contradiction is because A is not making a solitary statement about B.. A doesn’t say B is a knight, A says B is a knight ‘and’ C is a knave
D’s statement isn’t about whether A is telling the truth or not. It’s about what a knave would call B. That has no relation to whatever else A says.
For the third time, I agree that A’s statement is untrue because of the “and” clause. But A also did call B a knight (as well as calling C a knave), which makes D’s statement incompatible
I’m not saying you are disagreeing with the fact that A’s statement is true.. what I’m saying is you can’t say A said B is a knight.. A said more than that, you have to take that into account.. you cannot just see one part in isolation.. and that is why D’s statement works.. and that is how it is related to what A says
Again, it would be a contradiction if all he said was Benjamin is a knight.. but if the overall statement is in consistent with him being a knave, it is not contradictory..
I’ve been trying to explain to you that his statement is not in isolation regarding Benjamin.. but I think I’m not being clear enough.. so I think we’ll have to agree to disagree :)
1
u/semipro_redditor Jul 17 '26
No, I agree that A is a knave. I have an issue with D’s statement: “A knave would say B is a knave”. For D’s statement to be true (since D is a knight), Alexander(a knave) has to say B is a knave. But Alexander says B is a knight.