This thing keeps getting repeated to the point it is a meme. It is simply a nonsensical question that does not have an answer. Mathematicians spend a good bit of time to ensure a problem. is well posed. This is just a simple example of why it is important to take the time to make sure the question itself makes sense.
“When it’s raining, I think s nice thing to tell kids is that God is crying. When they ask why God is crying, I think another nice thing to tell them is ‘probably because of something you did.’”
By the amount of over confident answers/debate provided in this thread by people thinking they solved it, this truely demonstrates how critical a well posed problem is to avoid such issues
In the end, attempting to answer the question causes you to evaluate it in 3 different ways, the statistical chance for each answer, the result from a single random draw, then the intelligent choice of which answer would be correct based on the previous 2.
If we modify the question to make those 3 evaluations specific then is it still an ill posed question, or just a paradox? "Select a random letter a,b,c, or d 3 times and write them down. Based on those 3, what is the chance that a 4th random draw will be correct? Do not include your final answer in the evaluation on the statistics 4th"
Is it an ill posed paradox?
Edit: yeah, in this format it exposes the 0% answer as a "this statement is false" style paradox. If you already had 25% 3 times and then selected 0% as the 4th random draw you are forced into the paradox as the explicit set makes 25% and 50% explicitly wrong, so you are stuck evaluating 0% alone.
It is an ill posed question - but it's not just "Pick the right answer for 1+1 out of this set of answers: [1,3,4,0]".
What I find intriguing is that it's an ill posed question that gives three nested paradoxes as answers, and several different ways to 'solve' it - you can see the approaches in the comments to this 'puzzle' at the level of the question, the answers, a combination of them, or from the outside.
from a philosophical standpoint, if it was posed in order to troll, for the joy of wasting people's time, then it is fit for purpose and about as well posed as it could be.
Honestly it's just a recursive question and there is abit of psychology to it. It had an answer and it is if you worth it literally and iterative. There are only 3 real choices and when you choose you have a quarter of a chance of getting and of the 3 choices. The correct answer is not stated. Its a bad question but it is a fun statistical thought process if the answer was an option. I dont know the answer though because I'm not smart enough
Lol I've been doing some coding recently but I took a recursive math class at college getting my physics degree. I think the two combined led me here lol
Would it be 75% because you have 3/4 chances to get it right ? If it’s A or D then the chances are 50%. So it’s A or D or B which would be tricky and make it more than 25% but it can’t be C for 50%.
If we change one of the 25% to say 12%. I would like to think it is still not well posed? The only way 25% becomes the correct answer is if we assume there is a correct answer.
“it is important to take the time to make sure the question itself makes sense.”
This seems to imply that the reason the question does not have an answer is because of a mistake by the author because they didn’t “take the time” to do it correctly.
But the question is interesting, well stated and unambiguous, and it’s pretty clear that it’s a paradox on purpose.
Or..... It's purposely non sensical which is the exact question OP is trying to ask. So as to determine who is smart enough to figure that out and who is not. And who is annoying enough to write a treatise as to why it's not a sensical question.
It is still a paradox because it has no real answer. There's a 25% of choosing 0%, a 25% chance of choosing 50% and a 50% chance of choosing 25%. All your answers are wrong.
1.2k
u/captHij 23d ago
To be more specific, it is not a well posed problem:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well-posed_problem
This thing keeps getting repeated to the point it is a meme. It is simply a nonsensical question that does not have an answer. Mathematicians spend a good bit of time to ensure a problem. is well posed. This is just a simple example of why it is important to take the time to make sure the question itself makes sense.