Nobles and Savages: Sun God's Riddle

[Iron Mike]

This is an exercise in logical thinking. Assume the following story is true:

You are the sole survivor of a shipwreck and are drifting in a small raft parallel to the coast of an island. You know that on this island there are only two tribes of natives: Nobles, kind folk who always tell the truth, and Savages, cannibals who always lie. Naturally, you want to find refuge with the Nobles. You see a man standing on the shore and call out, "Are you a Noble or a Savage?" The man answers the question, but a wave breaks on the beach at that very moment, so you don't hear the reply. The boat drifts farther down along the shore when you see another man. You ask him the same question, and he replies, pointing to the first man, "He said he was a Noble." Then he continues, "I am a Noble." Your boat drifts farther down the shore where you see a third man. You ask him the same question. The man seems very friendly as he calls out, "They are both liars. I am a Noble. They are Savages."

Based on the information that is given, 1)Which tribe does each man belong to? And 2) How do you know?

[Shodan]

You ask one which tribe the other one would say he belongs to. The person you are asking about is a member of the other tribe.

---------- Post added at 06:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:40 PM ----------

For example:

You ask a person if the other person would say that they are a noble. If the person you are asking is a noble, he will truthfully say that the other person would say he is a noble, so that other person is a savage. If you ask a savage, he will untruthfully say the other person would say they are a savage, so the other person is a noble.

Easy one really.

[Iron Mike]

Originally Posted by Nyarlathotep

You ask one which tribe the other one belongs to. The person you ask him about is a member of the tribe the person you asked says he is not a member of.

No. You come across three men successively on an island. You ask each one which tribe they personally belong to, not about the other men.

[Shodan]

@Sun God

Lol I misread the riddle because I immediately recognized it as a variation of one I've seen a million fucking times. I'll try to resolve it later.

The whole concept is a trick right? Nobles and Savages. One tells the truth and the other lies, I find that's all extra info designed to trick us. I don't personally believe any of that info is relevant, the real focus should be on the the "Cannibal" issue.
If there's a tribe of cannibals what do they eat? Humans. Wouldn't a Cannibal be more interested in the other two standing on an island rather then the person floating on a raft? Which means all three are Nobles, or all three are savages. But since the third one called the other two out, I think all three are savages trying to trick you to come on shore
I may be wrong, that's how I see it.

[Iron Mike]

Originally Posted by Enfinite

The whole concept is a trick right? Nobles and Savages. One tells the truth and the other lies, I find that's all extra info designed to trick us. I don't personally believe any of that info is relevant, the real focus should be on the the "Cannibal" issue.
If there's a tribe of cannibals what do they eat? Humans. Wouldn't a Cannibal be more interested in the other two standing on an island rather then the person floating on a raft? Which means all three are Nobles, or all three are savages. But since the third one called the other two out, I think all three are savages trying to trick you to come on shore
I may be wrong, that's how I see it.

All three couldn't possibly be the same tribe for the simple fact that they contradict each other. The third man said "they are both liars." That doesn't mean he's telling the truth either but obviously someone is lying since they are saying different things. Given the fact that Nobles always tell the truth and Savages always lie, these men are of different tribes and can't possibly all be of the same tribe. As far as the cannibal issue, they would probably be even more interested in an unsuspecting human on a raft as opposed to island cohabitants who are already aware of their ways. It's all about easy prey.

Well, logically, if the third man were further down the coast than the second, the likelihood of his hearing him, and my not doing so is slim. Thus implying, that the third is therefore lying, and must be the savage. This means, then, that the second, because he was closer to the first man, and went out of the way to remark on the first man, positively. He must therefore be a noble. Also, as the second man did not remark that the first was a savage, despite the first's answer that he was a noble, the first must be a noble as well.

Originally Posted by Jack Herer

Well, logically, if the third man were further down the coast than the second, the likelihood of his hearing him, and my not doing so is slim. Thus implying, that the third is therefore lying, and must be the savage. This means, then, that the second, because he was closer to the first man, and went out of the way to remark on the first man, positively. He must therefore be a noble. Also, as the second man did not remark that the first was a savage, despite the first's answer that he was a noble, the first must be a noble as well.

You could also say the complete flip. The third man might have been too far to hear the first, but he may have heard the second make the remark about the first, and the claim the second made about being a noble. The third man can very well be a noble, and the first two savages.

And you did say the third man answered friendly. Where there was no context of how the first two answered. Since Nobles are kind you could assume the third one was truly a noble lol. I dunno.

[Iron Mike]

Originally Posted by Enfinite

You could also say the complete flip. The third man might have been too far to hear the first, but he may have heard the second make the remark about the first, and the claim the second made about being a noble. The third man can very well be a noble, and the first two savages.

I'm not arguing who's a Noble and who's a Savage yet. You're right...it could be either combination (until we apply logic), but my argument is they're not all of the same tribe.

Originally Posted by Enfinite

You could also say the complete flip. The third man might have been too far to hear the first, but he may have heard the second make the remark about the first, and the claim the second made about being a noble. The third man can very well be a noble, and the first two savages.

And you did say the third man answered friendly. Where there was no context of how the first two answered. Since Nobles are kind you could assume the third one was truly a noble lol. I dunno.

"He said he was a noble." was the remark. Not that he WAS a noble.