It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A simple thought experiment

page: 2
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:00 AM
link   
No contact with the outside world. Assuming alice , bob and I are all three marooned together on a deserted island. Relevance of tuesday? Relevance of 2+2=4?

It is now time to become the lord of the flies. We all know how far trust will get you in this situation. So bob died because alice has value. Now alice and I can decide together if it is tuesday or not and whether 2+2=4 or not.




posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by mileysubet

Originally posted by Destinyone

Originally posted by Tadeusz
The OP is waiting for someone slightly more... intelligent to respond.

What, what? Should I give up?


I apologize for wearing my party hat. On a more serious note. The trust I would show in either Alice or Bob, would naturally be proportionate to the trust I had in myself to make a value judgement. The degree of self trust would be contingent on current environmental influences.

Des


But yet the OP gives no environmental influences, so should we assume them?


The OP left us with a minimal skeletal structure. How we flesh it out is really up to each of us individually. Or, we can decide to form a group consensus mindset and build one single monster.

Des



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:05 AM
link   
reply to post by emberscott
 


Their is a paradox you are missing though. We were never told that alice told the truth and that bob lied. We were told one was a firend and the other is mostl likely a stranger. The reason we trust one and not the other. While their could be a reason we don't trust bob him being a liar we cannot fully know that. So again the experiment is to see how judgemental you will be to one or the other. What if alice lied to you and bob told you the truth? What if alice was the liar? Do you still not take bobs answers into account?



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Destinyone
reply to post by Tadeusz
 


I know math. I know the days of the week. Logic tells me that Alice and Bob are telling me the truth.

So, what is the point of your thread.

Des


This.Any post after this that says anything different makes me


Leave it to ATS to read things into a thread that aren't there.

OP thought he was being slick.I'll ask...what's the point of this thread?

This is one of those if a tree falls in a forest,will anyone hear it? type thread.

edit on 27-4-2012 by nightstalker78 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:12 AM
link   
reply to post by nightstalker78
 


Yes. but, without the forest or the tree...

Des



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Destinyone
reply to post by nightstalker78
 


Yes. but, without the forest or the tree...

Des



But they're both logical answers aren't they?



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tadeusz
Hooray, a thought experiment! Just like old times! No one? Sigh...

Suppose there is someone you trust, and someone you don't trust. Let's call them Alice and Bob respectively. You are presented with the following scenarios independently of each other. Each time you are asked to evaluate a statement: you can either accept it completely or you can doubt it. Assume you have no contact with the outside world, and have not had contact for an unknown period of time.

1. Alice tells you that 2 + 2 = 4.
2. Bob tells you that 2 + 2 = 4.
3. Alice tells you that today is a Tuesday.
4. Bob tells you that today is a Tuesday.

How do you evaluate them? Do any of the experiment constraints not apply to you? Just what is the purpose of this thought experiment?

You may answer any or all of them. Have at it!


But today is actually Friday......My Evaluation...They are Both Idiots!



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Manunnaki
 



The op


Assume you have no contact with the outside world, and have not had contact for an unknown period of time.


Me


Assuming alice , bob and I are all three marooned together on a deserted island.




I will recap.

Bob died. Bob no longer matters. Alice and I are on a deserted island together. Whether or not alice is a liar does not matter. There will not likely to be much trust between myself and alice. Whether or not today is tuesday does not matter. Whether or not 2+2=4 does not matter.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:27 AM
link   
reply to post by Tadeusz
 


Any answer that was received from someone that you didn't trust (with the condition that you didn't already know the answer), no matter what the person that you didn't trust told you, you would still be sceptical and unsure of the correct answer.

Alternatively, if you received an answer (whether the same or different from the other person), from someone you trusted, you would be more likely to accept that as the correct answer.

This would also be contingent on environmental factors and what your current knowledge in the field would be.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by emberscott
 


I will re-cap the post I put on page 1. the math problem and the day are metaphorical for any information that is given by each individual. The excercise is to see what your stance is on recieving info from someone you trust and someone you do not.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Truthandinfo
reply to post by Tadeusz
 


Any answer that was received from someone that you didn't trust (with the condition that you didn't already know the answer), no matter what the person that you didn't trust told you, you would still be sceptical and unsure of the correct answer.


Yes, but let's assume that you know your arithmetic. How would you treat the statement that 2 + 2 = 4 if it came from someone you didn't trust?

By the way, thanks for reminding me. I will now amend the description with this assumption.

Also, kudos for ignoring the names of Alice and Bob.
edit on 27-4-2012 by Tadeusz because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Manunnaki
 


That is one part of the exercise. The other part was not made very clear, and I have now amended the description.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Manunnaki
 


That is your post. Your account name is manunnaki. I was not replying a post to you.


I was replying to the post of the original poster. The original posters account name is tadeusz.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by emberscott
 


And I was helping you see another side of the spectrum that you may or may not have missed. Just because someone comes along replies to you and shows you another path. Does not always mean they are throwing dirt on you. And someone throwing dirt on you is not always trying to hurt you.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:50 AM
link   
If this was a hypothetical situation, I would have killed them both to eliminate the ambiguity, and not allowed them to influence my decision.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Tadeusz
 


If I knew (in this case) maths, the question would not relate to whether I trusted the other person or not.

After receiving the answer to the question, I would judge its accuracy from my own knowledge base.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Manunnaki
reply to post by emberscott
 


And I was helping you see another side of the spectrum that you may or may not have missed. Just because someone comes along replies to you and shows you another path. Does not always mean they are throwing dirt on you. And someone throwing dirt on you is not always trying to hurt you.



Other side of what spectrum? How are you helping me? Was I supposed to read through the reply posts to look for help before replying to the original post?

Now from the original post


How do you evaluate them? Do any of the experiment constraints not apply to you? Just what is the purpose of this thought experiment?

You may answer any or all of them. Have at it!


I believe I posted in accordance with the original post. But several posts later you decided to add in this and that.
And now you want to go back and forth with me about it? It was simple post. I gave it a simple thought and replied. There is no paradox in my assumed scenario.

Maybe you assume whenever I read a post I should read through the replies before I post my reply?


You are always welcome to make your own 'Simple thought thread' the way you want it to be. And maybe I will read it and reply. And maybe we can go back and forth about it.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 02:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Tadeusz
 


We can know that 2 + 2 = 4 by testing this mathematic equation with objects.

For example, we can put 2 rocks on one side and 2 rocks on the other side. Then we can bring them together and count how many there are now (4).

As for the day of the week, there is no way to know because "days of the week" is just a cultural idea. There is nothing with the movement of the Earth or the sunrise or sunset to know if it is one of the seven "days of the week". Mathematics can be tested with actual objects so it exists, but the days of the week are just names.



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 02:35 AM
link   
reply to post by mileysubet
 


Killing them might just be the right answer.

If you can't trust someone in a survival situation, then they are probably best used for food. And we know that power corrupts, so the person you trust will realize you trust them and that trust will become corrupted.

The logical answer is to cannibalize both of them.
edit on 27-4-2012 by Logmafia because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2012 @ 03:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Tadeusz
 


I think what I would have to do is question the reasons for my distrust of the one due to the statements being the same as given by the one I trusted.

The alternative choice would be to begin to distrust BOTH...but I know 2 + 2 = 4....so I'd go with trust...besides that...trust is an easier way to live as long as one does not forget to trust one's self before anyone else, in the first place...

That is...go with your gut...then evaluate the rest based on what you feel is trustworthy and logical.

But that's just me. I tend to trust more than distrust, as a rule. I trust most everyone until I have a reason not to.
And truly, it hasn't given me too much heartache at all...




top topics



 
2
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join