A little brain teaser

If you would like to give your mind a little test, have a shot at figuring this out:

----------

Hypothetical Situation:

You and an associate are having a discussion - they tell you something unbelievable, to which you telll them to stop wasting your time with blatant lies.

However, your associate then says "you're right, all I ever do is tell lies - I never, ever say anything that's true".

Now - if what they said was true, it means they weren't lying.
But - if what they said was false, it means they do tell the truth.

So - the question is:
Were they lying, or telling the truth?

Aren't the best lies are those that contain elements of truth, so in this case are they a lie or a perception of the truth, or straight up truth.

But truth like art is in the eye of the beholder, we all have out own truths.

*pulls hair out* And I have no idea if they lie or tell the truth in your senario...I need a lie detector *chuckles*.

It could always be an equivocation, than it would be both true and false.

Interesting answers from both of you, but if you really must know the correct answer is actually....

Neither, and Both, at the same time.

You see, the puzzle itself is actually what is known as a "self reference paradox".

Paradoxes are great for confusing people - in fact, here's some more if you want to have a crack at it:

A) "Is the answer to this question no?"
B) "What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?"

argh self reference paradox, no wonder I was pulling my poor hair out *chuckles*.

My brain isn't really following A...

And Splat comes to mine with B hehe. That is splat for the user as they seem to be the only one that is vulnerable...

HK-49 wrote:

A) "Is the answer to this question no?"
B) "What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?"

A) It couldn't be =P
B) Nothing- they balance out, right?

A) not so sure about
B) Hulk Hogan beats Andrai the Giant

Ah - always nice to see the kind of answers that people will come up with (in particular, Aidoneos' answer to B) was quite entertaining).

However, a brief explanation of both should help ease any confusions over the two paradoxes.

For A) - "Is the answer to this question no?":

Taking this question in a "true/false" context, a few important points come to mind:

If true, you answer with "yes", stating that you believe the answer of the question is indeed "no". However, in answering with "yes", you would then need to change your answer to "no" to comply with your original answer.

If false, you answer with "no", stating that you believe that the answer is not "no". However, if this is the case, then the only other answer to the question would be "yes" - and that would lead to the point made if you were to initially answer that question by saying "yes", as you would be stating how the answer to the question was indeed "no".

The end result is that the question ends in an infinite loop - answering in one of the two available ways will always lead back to the other.


For B) - "What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?":

Taking this one in a literal context, an "irresistable force" is one that cannot, in any way at all, be stopped. In the same light, an "immovable force" is one that cannon, in any way at all, be moved.

Now, logically, one would say that since this is the case - a force that cannot be stopped colliding with a force that cannot be moved - then it would be logical to suggest that they would cancel each other out.

However, such a statement is in conflict with the nature of the two forces themselves; since if the case was that they did cancel each other out, then said forces would neither be "irresistable" or "immovable". Thus the validity of such a statement is rendered null and void.

If you considering each force in a seperate point of view, the irresistable force cannot be stopped, meaning that anything placed in its path will be moved aside by this force - meaning that something such as an immovable force could no possibly exist.

On the other hand, the immovable force cannot be moved, meaning that anything which tries to move it will be stopped by this force - meaning that something such as an irresistable force could possibly not exist.

Like with question A), question B) spirals into the depths of infinitely looping around within itself, as each statement - "irresistable" and "immovable" - counteracts the other.


This will no doubt sound like utter nonsense to some people, but when you think about it, what are paradoxical questions if not utterly mind boggling and confusing? XP

you could just argue that B is irrelevant because it's impossible and that the answer to A is "no" on account that you'd rather lie than be part of a loop lasting forever xD

*chuckles* thanks for the heads up. Especially with A)...

I wouldn't say that B) is so much "irrelevant" as it is "unanswerable", but you make a valid point about A).

However, if you lie in your answer to A) - by answering with "no" - then you have effectively answered the question truthfully, even though you lied:

"Is the answer to this question no?": no.

And as you can see, if you were truthful in your original answer, you would have technically lied:

"Is the answer to this question no?": yes.

Therefore, it's technically impossible to escape from the loop in this particular question.

Well, that's correct xD
In that case, my way to escape this problem is to hide it like it doesn't exist =P
So:
A) █████████████████████████?
Thus, saving the world from headaches and further frustration =D (and also creating a lot of denial on my part o.O)
...Having things unsolved/unanswered isn't good for me xD

*chuckles* its alright shrig32, thats why HK-49 is here, to use their all power brain to solve the hard puzzles while everyone else distracts you *grins*.