Monday Puzzle #3: "Circular Reasoning"

[All Seeing Eye]

I'll post in thread since the thread is now over.

This puzzle makes no sense for the following reason:

Jadzia wrote:

---

but the yellow shapes are never square

Ok so a yellow must be either circle or triangle because they are never square.

Jadzia wrote:

---

neither triangles nor circles are rough.

So a yellow object cannot be rough because a yellow object can only be a circle or triangle.

Jadzia wrote:

---

While with rough shapes, if they're not circles, they must at least be yellow.

Only squares can be rough, therefore they're not circles and therefore from what you say must be yellow.
But you've said (in the top quote of this post) that yellow shapes are never square.

So this makes no sense at all. It contradicts itself.

How anyone got the answer is beyond me.

[kathryn i am]

I don't think the thread has quite run its course yet, Tachyon Shield... the answer is normally given on Friday.

[Jadzia]

Tachyon Shield wrote:

---

I'll post in thread since the thread is now over.

Not until friday.

So this makes no sense at all. It contradicts itself.

Your reasoning is unsound.

[All Seeing Eye]

oh sorry I thought thread was over. I saw the last post said "such and such is correct" so I thought the winner had been named.

Sorry.

It still don't make sense though.

[Zion Ravescene]

Tachyon Shield wrote:

---

oh sorry I thought thread was over. I saw the last post said "such and such is correct" so I thought the winner had been named.

Sorry.

It still don't make sense though.

That's the great thing about this contest. There's a winner, but the contest goes on until the last one is dead.

[Jadzia]

Tachyon Shield wrote:

---

oh sorry I thought thread was over. I saw the last post said "such and such is correct" so I thought the winner had been named.

Sorry.

It still don't make sense though.

Okay, well I might as well give some general help with the puzzle.

Contradiction is a valid tool in reasoning, and arguably the most important. When you chain several logical statements together, it is common to create contradictions with values of some the variables, and that says something important about those variables -- specifically values which cannot appear in any solution.

So for example, if one statement said "blue objects are always hexagons" and another said "hexagons can never be blue", then you can deduce that "blue objects cannot be blue".

This is not a contradiction of the "colour" variable, but is a contradiction of a specific value of the colour variable. This simply means that the colour variable cannot take the value of "blue" in any solution to the problem.

If there are no blue objects, then rules about blue objects are arbitrary and become irrelevant.

[trampledamage]

Jadzia wrote:

---

Okay, well I might as well give some general help with the puzzle.

Contradiction is a valid tool in reasoning, and arguably the most important. When you chain several logical statements together, it is common to create contradictions with values of some the variables, and that says something important about those variables -- specifically values which cannot appear in the solution.

So for example, if one statement said "blue objects are always hexagons" and another said "hexagons can never be blue", then you can deduce that "blue objects cannot be blue".

This is not a contradiction of the "colour" variable, but is a contradiction of a specific value of the colour variable. This simply means that the colour variable cannot take the value of "blue" in any solution to the problem.

It's the various contradictions that make it possible to solve

[All Seeing Eye]

Well i'm beat, my head hurts with it so I give in.

[kathryn i am]

Jadzia wrote:

---

If there are no blue objects, then rules about blue objects are arbitrary and become irrelevant.

This is a very big clue

[NickInABox]

::Tents fingers::

I like the direction the ____ Quiz is going.

[Zion Ravescene]

NickInABox wrote:

---

::Tents fingers::

I like the direction the ____ Quiz is going.

Consider it a reboot. Starring Karl Urban as Zion Ravescene.

[trampledamage]

Zion Ravescene wrote:

---

Consider it a reboot. Starring Karl Urban as Zion Ravescene.

I'd watch it! Any chance of casting photos

[Zion Ravescene]

trampledamage wrote:

---

I'd watch it! Any chance of casting photos

Ask Crusher Disciple.

[Jadzia]

Another correct answer from Spot's Meow.

edit + 30 minutes : Also Ood Sigma

[All Seeing Eye]

Jadzia wrote:

---

Another correct answer from Spot's Meow.

I feel.......................................... retarded.