Backward Reasoning
“… Suppose a teacher tells the class that he will give them a surprise
quiz in the following week. Now, the teacher cannot give the quiz on
Friday because when it is Thursday, the whole class will know for sure
that the quiz will be on Friday, so it won't be a "surprise" anymore.
But the teacher cannot give the quiz on Thursday because the quiz
cannot be on Friday (for reason stated above) and when it is Wednesday,
the whole class will know for sure that the quiz will be on Thursday,
so it won't be a "surprise" either. Similarly, the teacher cannot give
the quiz on Wednesday, Tuesday, or Monday. The conclusion is that a
teacher can never give a real "surprise" quiz. What is wrong about this
(backward) reasoning? ”
李天命 (2002-12-20 15:20:00)
If the students are convinced by this reasoning and accept the
conclusion // that a teacher can never give a real "surprise"
quiz//,then the teacher can give a quiz on Monday or Tuesday or ...or
Friday (or even Saturday or Sunday, by calling them to come to school
for a quiz), to their real surprise. ^^
"沒有可能" 中的 "可能" 是
1. 邏輯可能
2. 事實可能
3. 技術可能
?
詳情可參看《哲道行者》
首先假設這句話是真的。
則我們可以推出﹕不可能在星期五測驗。
因為如果在星期五測驗,我們在星期四就會知道。
同樣理由,也不可能在星期四測驗。因為如果在星期四測驗的話,我們在星期三就會知道,因爲我們己經排除星期五測驗的可能性。
如此類推,星期一至星期五都不可能會測驗。所以那句話是假的。
結論﹕那句話沒有邏輯錯誤,只是假的。即他或者不會測驗,或者會在測驗前告訴學生。
首先,得出了星期一至星期五都不可能會測驗的結論,而老師又說將於下星期一至五這五天其中一天給予測驗,這不是自相矛盾嗎?
如果倒返轉頭去想,到了星期日,同學的確不知星期一會否測驗,如果用返海澎兄的推論,則得出同學預知了星期一會測,如果當真是星期一測,那麼同學便估到了,老師的話便是假話,但如果是星期二測的話,同學便會估錯一次,但之後又再估星期二測,所以要估兩次先中.如果是星期三測的話,便會估錯兩次...如是者,如果要推出星期五測,便會估錯四次.
即是,同學日日都估係明天測,用這種屈機方式屈到老師的話成了假話.
我仍搞不清老師的話到底屬哪類....
我還想到,要是推出星期五測,前提是星期1-4沒有測驗.
要是推出星期四測,前提是推到星期1-3&5沒有測驗才行.
但前提只有星期1-3沒有測驗,不足以支持星期5沒有測驗.
所以要是推出星期四測的話,沒有星期5沒有測驗這個前提,那麼星期四測這結論便不成立.
對不對?
當同學們都估計老師講假話(即不會測驗或測驗前會通知)時,如果他真的在某一天(例如星期三)突然測驗,這又出乎大家的意料。
這樣一來,老師的話就是真的:他確實在星期一至五的其中一天測驗,而於測驗那天前確實沒有可能知道在哪天進行測驗。
這樣看來,老師的話不但沒有邏輯問題,而且可以是真的。
這樣一來,老師的話就是真的:他確實在星期一至五的其中一天測驗,而於測驗那天前確實沒有可能知道在哪天進行測驗。
這樣看來,老師的話不但沒有邏輯問題,而且可以是真的。
我都係perfer沒有邏輯問題.完全agree~
這問题的邏輯錯誤只適用於星期五,不能說全無邏輯
有趣^^
點解張生一時話真一時又話假ge?
「我將於下星期一至五這五天其中一天給予你們測驗,你們於測驗那天前是沒有可能得知我在哪天舉行測驗的。」
老師的說話有兩句.
如果前一句是真,
後一句可以推出"下星期一至五沒有測驗",這時意思即是下星期一至五其中一天有測驗並且沒有測驗,即是廢話.
如果前一句是假,後一句沒所謂真假.
結論: 一係講廢話, 一係講假話
這個難題很有趣
在明報網無意中發現原來有人問過,李生亦答過,但我的英文/腦筋太差劣,不明李生所言,在此請教各位!
Re:Faustus (2002-12-20 11:45:20)
Backward Reasoning
“… Suppose a teacher tells the class that he will give them a surprise
quiz in the following week. Now, the teacher cannot give the quiz on
Friday because when it is Thursday, the whole class will know for sure
that the quiz will be on Friday, so it won't be a "surprise" anymore.
But the teacher cannot give the quiz on Thursday because the quiz
cannot be on Friday (for reason stated above) and when it is Wednesday,
the whole class will know for sure that the quiz will be on Thursday,
so it won't be a "surprise" either. Similarly, the teacher cannot give
the quiz on Wednesday, Tuesday, or Monday. The conclusion is that a
teacher can never give a real "surprise" quiz. What is wrong about this
(backward) reasoning? ”
李天命 (2002-12-20 15:20:00)
If the students are convinced by this reasoning and accept the
conclusion // that a teacher can never give a real "surprise"
quiz//,then the teacher can give a quiz on Monday or Tuesday or ...or
Friday (or even Saturday or Sunday, by calling them to come to school
for a quiz), to their real surprise. ^^
在明報網無意中發現原來有人問過,李生亦答過,但我的英文/腦筋太差劣,不明李生所言,在此請教各位!
李先生的意思與張先生 #5 的相若。
Website: http://chanlikhangnick.googlepages.com/index.html
Blog: http://theprincipia.blogspot.com/
大致明白答案是會給學生1個real suprise.
但那個推論到底哪處出了毛病,仍是看不到.
大致明白答案是會給學生1個real suprise.
但那個推論到底哪處出了毛病,仍是看不到.
結論﹕那句話沒有邏輯錯誤,只是假的。即他或者不會測驗,或者會在測驗前告訴學生。
︿︿
正確思方仍未掌握,各師兄們請多賜教
算是補充#4
未過星期四,未知星期五測.
過左星期四,知道星期五測.
.
過左星期三,未過星期四,知道星期四測.<-------- 謬論-未過星期四,未知星期五測.未能排除星期五測的可能性.
發表新回應