Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 06:12:37 09/27/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 27, 2002 at 08:37:46, Rolf Tueschen wrote: [snipped - hope its okay...] >>"Suppose you're on a game show, and you're given a choice of three doors. Behind >>one door is a car; behind the others, goats. You pick a door-;say No. 1-;and the >>host, who knows what's behind the doors, opens another door-;say No. 3-;which >>has a goat. He then says to you, “Do you want to pick door No. 2?” Is it to your >>advantage to switch your choice? " >> >>So we agree that a contestant may or may not have the knowledge needed, but >>eventhough it is the contestant that should decide in the actual show, it isn't >>the contestant that should decide NOW, now it is YOU, and you have just been >>fully informed. >> >>I believe an equivalent (but much less confusing) formulation of the question >>could be: >> >>"Suppose George is on a game show, and George is given a choice of three doors. >>Behind one door is a car; behind the others, goats. George picks a door, and the >>host, who knows what's behind the doors, opens another door, which has a goat. >>He then says to George, “Do you want to pick door No. 2?” Is it to George's >>advantage to say yes? " >> >>Obviously it isn't George he is asking, it is you who knows the truth. >> >>So I believe Marilyn gave the correct answer/explanation after all. >>The short answer would have been "yes". >> >>-S. > >Now you've entered into the deep mode and that is fine. However do not confuse >your argumentation and the question if Marilyn was right. I just answered on >Uri, who already made a couple of your arguments. Of course we have >"possibilities" here, but a real expert, in such a twilight situation, as you >agreed, must at least give a few adds and not just a short yes. So I stay to my >No because a real expert must also consider the candidate as he was in the show, >innocent, not with the complete knowledge. I see it as though there two levels, there is the question the host is asking George, and there is the question being asked to you. I believe you are discussing what should be Georges reply, while me and Marilyn wants to reply the final question, ie using a knowledge that George may or may not have to respond on his behalf. I simply consider the knowledge of George to be irrelevant. So no wonder we don't see eye to eye on this, but with my "clarification" of the question, I hope we can come to some sort of agreement, unless you feel the questions are not equivalent in some way. > So now we should see tht the problem >was really worth it to be in a topic here. We learned that we should always be >very careful before we reject critics. > >Thank you for the energy you spent on the topic Yes that must have burned a few kJoules:) -S. >Rolf Tueschen
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.