Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
Richard Langer wrote:
The man has one of the following
older son older son
younger son younger daughter
=20
The woman has one of the following
older son older son older daughter
younger son younger daughter younger son
Others (e.g., Stanley McCaslin, Maurice Barnhill, David Bowman)=20
presented similar evidence and all went on to use these equal=20
probability outcomes to answer the question.
Nevertheless, despite the fact that this line of reasoning is=20
absolutely *correct* (neglecting the very minor "real world"=20
considerations that some mentioned and the philosophical concerns=20
that Leigh and I have expressed), I do not find it at all=20
*convincing* at a gut level as Maurice--one of very few who responded=20
to my request and expressed a level of confidence in his answer--also=20
confessed. Moreover, I think the response from Marilyn's readers=20
proves my point. To them (and, obviously, to some if not most of=20
us), whether or not the known son is older *seems* irrelevant; the=20
*only* question in either case seems to be, "What is the gender of=20
the other child?" (I find it interesting to note that this *is* the=20
only question *only* because the order of birth info is *not*=20
irrelevant and only *when* the order of birth info is given.)