Nobles and Savages: Sun God's Riddle

[Student]

Originally Posted by Sun God

Why do you think the first guy was a Savage?

I Broke It Down Further, Read Above.

Edit: Initially I Looked At The Second Guy Saying The First Guy Said He Was A Noble Then Said He Was A Noble As The First Guy Was Lying. 3rd Guy Says Both Are Lying But Since Savages Lie (And He Mentions Lying I Assumed He Was A Savage).

[ILLoKWENT]

Lol... shits not that complicated... the 2 important info needed is WHAT ARE THE ABSOLUTES TRUTHS.. we all know the first absolute=nobles ALWAYS TELL THE TRUTH...and savages ALWAYS LIE... we know the second absolute based on the first...EVERYONE ON THE ISLAND WILL SAY THEYRE NOBLES...nobles will say theyre nobles and savages will automatically lie and claim theyre nobles as well....
So 1st dude says (not determined) 2nd dude says 1st dude claimed noble....which automatically makes 2nd dude a NOBLE... now the 3rd dude claims they are both liars... which automatically makes him a savage for contradicting the second ABSOLUTE..and since we now know that he will always lie... then logically whatever he claims has to be the EXACT OPPOSITE.... so if he claims both 1st and 2nd dude are savages.... then by the 1st ABSOLUTE.... the exact opposite is the truth..hence 1st and 2nd dudes are NOBLES..........

^Again though, the wording is that "Both of them are lying".

The a lie doesn't have to be the exact opposite of a truth.

Both of them are lying, as a lie, simply means that there is no possibly way that "BOTH of them are lying".

There is no way to conclude if 1 is or isn't a savage or noble.

[ILLoKWENT]

Originally Posted by Dave

^Again though, the wording is that "Both of them are lying".

The a lie doesn't have to be the exact opposite of a truth.

Both of them are lying, as a lie, simply means that there is no possibly way that "BOTH of them are lying".

There is no way to conclude if 1 is or isn't a savage or noble.

Its determined by deduction... we already know that regardless if the first dude wasnt heard..that he will claim noble..2nd dude confirms he is a noble by telling the truth.. and using that info.. we can now determine that The last dudes a savage..and anything he says is a lie... so if he says both are savages...then they are nobles..lol.. theres no way around it..

[ILLoKWENT]

Both of them are lying means theres no possible way both of them are lying?.... this statement is self contradicting....

[ViTRiOL]

Originally Posted by ViTRiOL

So to put it blatantly.

If the the third man was a Noble, the first two would HAVE to be Savages.

Surely that's understandable now?

... sigh.

Originally Posted by ILLoKWENT

Both of them are lying means theres no possible way both of them are lying?.... this statement is self contradicting....

If we know he's a savage, ergo lying.

"Both of them are lying" would mean that, as this statement is a lie, that there is no conceivable way that BOTH of them are lying.




You guys are playing opposites too much.

Number 2 said that Number 1 SAID he was a noble (which is the truth). He at no point said he WAS a noble.

Number 3 said that both of them were lying. As he is a savage, this just means that one or none of them were lying.

[ILLoKWENT]

Originally Posted by Dave

If we know he's a savage, ergo lying.

"Both of them are lying" would mean that, as this statement is a lie, that there is no conceivable way that BOTH of them are lying.




You guys are playing opposites too much.

Number 2 said that Number 1 SAID he was a noble (which is the truth). He at no point said he WAS a noble.

Number 3 said that both of them were lying. As he is a savage, this just means that one or none of them were lying.

He said both were lying... that automatically tells u that both 1 and 2 are nobles because anything the savage says is false.. and number 1 didnt have to say anything because as soon as the savage says that BOTH ARE SAVAGES..that statement again dictates that the opposite is true... so hes basically reiterating his initial lie...