Subject: No...
Author:
Posted on: 2015-10-01 16:07:00 UTC
...I am going to ask it complicated yes/no questions (totally different from convoluted, you know) that are still totally within the rules of this ridiculous island because only by guaranteeing that the lion is lying to me can I begin to find truth in the world.
-Phobos, mad genius or just mad?
Probably just mad.
Just so everyone knows, I'm not leaving (temporarily) out of anger or resentment: quite the opposite! Y'all are too darn interesting. I find myself thinking about the PPC a little too often, especially when I'm trying to focus on other things. I think a little time away will do the trick.
Here is my exit music, and I also leave you all with a riddle.
The wise and knowledgeable man is sure of it.
Even the fool knows it.
The rich man wants it.
The greatest of heroes fears it.
Yet the lowliest of cowards would die for it.
What is this upon which I ponder?
Oh, also, I will not be gone from Gmail, so to anyone with whom I chat: I'm still here!
See you guys in a few weeks!
-Alleb
How do you catch an answer?
What does the wise man always know?
And as Khajiit has heard heard you say, do not cheat.
The first thing I saw was a page comprised of almost nothing but the word "spoilers" in various states of capslockery :p idk, gave me a chuckle.
Have a good vacation!!!!
What word is the same when you remove its begining, middle, and end?
Good luck with this one.
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERSSPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERSSPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERSSPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERSSPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
I believe you are empty. It's okay. We all are. =]
What's taller than any tree
its veins are harvested for its riches.
Yet it never dies.
AND
What has rivers and oceans without water
villages without people
Forests without their leaves?
As so often occurs in puzzles, you find yourself shipwrecked on an island. The population of this island can be partitioned into two groups: knights and knaves. Knights answer all questions truthfully; knaves always lie. While wandering, you come upon a building with two doors, each guarded by one native islander. You know that one of the doors leads to a pile of treasure, and the other leads to a hungry, man-eating lion. You may ask a single yes/no question to one of the guards. Then you must select a door, and meet your fortune/death.
Challenge: If you know nothing about the distribution of the two islanders (maybe two knights, maybe two knaves, maybe one of each), what question do you ask?
Hard challenge: The island also contains some residents who reply at random. You happen upon three islanders, and know that there is one of each type (Knave, Knight, Random). You may ask three yes/no questions. (Each question can be addressed to only one of the islanders.) What do you ask in order to determine their identities?
I turn polar bears white
And I will make you cry.
I make guys have to urinate
And girls comb their hair.
I make celebrities look stupid
And normal people look like celebrities.
I turn pancakes brown
And make your champagne bubble.
If you squeeze me, I'll pop.
If you look at me, you'll pop.
Can you answer this riddle?
The fact that I'm still wandering this island (rather than visiting the harbour and getting a ship home) indicates that this isn't a sci-fi setting or anything else with decent construction standards. So I climb up onto the roof of the building and peel back some of the thatch, or pull off a couple of tiles, or whatever, to see what's inside each section.
Then, since the knights are clearly a bunch of sadists (they let the knaves wander around lying about everything, rather than instituting some kind of legal system), I pop the 'lion' door from above and let it eat them.
Then I leave. I don't take the treasure. I'm trapped on an island, what am I going to do with treasure?
To while away the time until a ship passes, I write up a treatise on the bizarre social system which has led to lying being acceptable to the population of the island, to some people literally never lying, and to huts with lions and treasure in them being 'guarded' by people who will happily let you be eaten by lions.
Because seriously.
hS
After you leave the building, how are you planning to avoid being eaten by the lion? Since fighting it would defeat the point of your solution and the whole puzzle, and hiding in the building would likely delay rescue and be inconvenient to survival.
I'm just curious about this; I liked both your response and the puzzle.
I figure that's enough to put it to sleep. If not, since I'm on the roof I can sneak out the other side of the building.
The main problem is going to be that the lion is now loose on the island. That's going to make it tricky for Phobos to figure out how many fingers anyone is holding up - he's going to have to watch out for the lion.
Though the fact that they managed to lock the lion away in the first place... are we sure it's a lion and not a Pokemon or something?
Or maybe there's a lion tamer somewhere. With a hat. That says 'lion tamer' in neon letters when you push a button.
hS
I am not trapped on an island with a deadly lion. No, it is trapped on an island with me. Poor thing doesn't know what it's in for.
-Phobos, who fears no lion
...I am going to ask it complicated yes/no questions (totally different from convoluted, you know) that are still totally within the rules of this ridiculous island because only by guaranteeing that the lion is lying to me can I begin to find truth in the world.
-Phobos, mad genius or just mad?
Probably just mad.
You can just brute force your way through a logic puzzle. That is like, as you noted in the Mecha thread above, an agent just brute forcing their way throught a Sue instead of just being clever and resourceful despite being stuck in a ridiculous situation. Something exactly like the situation created by this puzzle.
I didn't attack the guards, I didn't smash the building. I carefully worked around the presumed restrictions placed by you.
If your only solution to killing a mech-using Sue is to destroy the mech with her in it, it doesn't matter how clever you are about doing it - you're still being narrow-minded.
Portal her out of the mech. Peek in through the thatch. Start a people's revolution to provide apples for all. Don't let them dictate what you're 'supposed' to do.
hS
But with a logic puzzle, just about the only way to go is to "let them dictated what you're 'supposed' to do" and find a way to solve within those rules. Otherwise, it isn't
a logic puzzle anymore.
Let's take an example from last time we did this. There was a puzzle wherein you were stuck in a room where the door was only unlocked for one minute every hour, trying to turn the handle any other time would electrocute you, and all you had was a match and a rope that takes two hours to burn. Something along those lines.
The logic puzzle is 'how can you use a 2-hour rope to measure 1 hour?'. In that situation, there's not very many solutions (though it occurs to me that you might be able to make a pendulum...). But:
That wasn't the goal we were given. The goal was 'escape with only these things'. Following the unspoken rules (you must escape by timing one hour) is... silly.
You, the puzzle creator, get to set the stage. You say what the building is like. You say what the guards will or won't do. You say how many questions we're allowed to ask. And a solution like 'I repeatedly ask the guards the same question until they crack and answer it anyway' would go against the spirit of the puzzle, absolutely.
But doing something that the puzzler didn't account for? That's fair game, as far as I'm concerned.
~
Since this is supposed to be a practical thread, not just a theory one: here, have a puzzle.
You are on a classic desert island - a small 'hill' of sand surrounded entirely by deep water, clear out to the horizon. A single coconut palm grows on the island. You have nothing else except the clothes you were wearing when you came there. There is no ship in sight (nor the wreckage of one), but you know that ships can appear briefly on the horizon at irregular intervals.
Escape.
I have a solution in mind. I won't tell you yours is wrong, though. ;)
Can you tell me if there any coconuts growing on the palm tree?
Step 0: retrieve arms from chest.
Step 1: Retrieve coconuts from tree.
Step 2: Break open coconuts. Somehow.
Step 3: Eat their flesh and use the shells to fashion tools.
Step 4: Devise a complicated mechanism to desalinate water using coconut shells.
Step 5: Survive long enough to grow your hair long. Drink water and eat fish.
Step 6: Make ropes out of hair.
Step 7: Go looking for turtles.
Step 8: Using hair-harnesses, domesticate turtles.
Step 9: Make boat out of palm tree.
Step 10: Tie turtles to palm tree raft and ride your way to freedom.
...but how about this?
Step 1: Punch tree for wood (plant any saplings you find to ensure tree farm)
Step 2: Craft crafting table
Step 3: Craft shovel and pick
Step 4: Channel your inner Dwarf and diggy diggy hole
Step 5: Stone and coal
Step 6: Iron
Step 7: Diamonds
Step 8: Get lost in massive branching cave system
Step 9: Give up and dig a new exit, discovering that you are back on the mainland
Step 10: Have no idea how to get back to your island to retrieve your chests full of stuff
-Phobos, thinking inside the box
I now have a mighty need to go and start a new Minecraft world.
Because I know some Youtubers who showed you can have great fun with an island. (They're French, but Minecraft is universal).
Merci pour le lien! Ch'uis plus habitué à entendre l'accent québécois lorsqu'on parle français mais bon: ça fera changement.
Climb up on the tree, grab a full-grown coconut and a palm tree leaf, rip out the green parts of the leaf, keep the inner part as a spear, jump out onto the ocean, hold onto to the coconut (and hope this does not cause you to drown and die), use the spear to fish and thus obtain food and fresh water, and wait out until a ship appears?
-Js, who is not sure of his solution and the one actually think inside the box
... that everyone would rather I shut up and stayed out of this thread.
hS
Well that and the fact I would be dragged out by my ear if I didn't but still.
Your fey is showing.
Can't speak for anyone else, of course.
-Phobos
They are just not in the realm of possible and correct solutions, that's all.
Besides, once you know the right way, these challenges become really easy. ;)
"If I asked the other guard the question, which would they pick?"
The hard challenge is, of course, solved by having thought to bring a loaded quad-barrelled elephant gun in one's hand luggage. =]
May I remind that you are limited to 'simple yes/no questions'?
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
For the first challenge, pick a guard and ask "Would the other guard say your door leads to treasure?" If the answer is yes, pick the other door. If the answer is no, pick the door you asked about door.
Still working on the hard challenge.
-Phobos
This is a solution if there is one knave and one knight and each knows who the other is.
But didn’t the challenge include that there may be two knights or two knaves?
(I don’t have a solution for this).
HG
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
Ask a guard, "If the other guard is the opposite of you, which door would he choose?" and then take the other door.
You're forcing the guard to answer as if they're opposites, so it doesn't make any difference whether they really are or not.
The logic behind the question is correct, but the actual question is not.
You're supposed to only ask yes/no questions.
Supposed the other guard were the opposite of you (and male :-), would he say that this door leads to the treasure?
CASE answer:
WHEN "no" THEN take this door
WHEN "yes" THEN take the other door
END-CASE.
Thanks to Phobos and Pippa’s Ghost for doing most of the work.
HG
Somehow I missed that in my initial reading. So, I will need to re-examine the question and come up with a better solution.
-Phobos
Don't know how I, who proposed the challenge, missed that one either. I sort of had doubts of this exact nature. So I goofed up too. Sorry.
But yeah, you can't guarantee that you're being lied to if both people are telling the truth.
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
One possible solution. Care to share what thought process made you arrive at it? And what about the third riddle?
Well, it occurs to me that you need two pieces of information. 1) Which guard is the Knave/Knight 2) Which door has the treasure.
Asking either guard which door has the treasure is not going to do it. What if that guard is the Knave? You die. Wouldn't want that to happen. So, the only way to ensure that you know the truth is to guarantee that you are being lied to.
Asking Guard 1 what guard 2 would say works because if Guard 1 is the Knave then he will lie about the Knight's response (which would have been a truthful answer. Likewise, if Guard 1 is the Knight, he will tell you the truth about Guard 2's response (which would have been a lie). Either way, you are being lied to, making the actual identities of the guards irrelevant. That being the case, take the door they say is certain death.
The hard challenge is much more interesting. Now you only need one set of information, but the sources of said information are less reliable.
So, let's try talking it through. Label the islanders A, B, and C for simplicity (we'll need as much of that as we can get).
Question 1:
Ask A, "Would B say he is certain he could predict C's answer, if B knew what I was going to ask C?" Complicated, but a Yes/No question none the less.
What does A answer? If Yes, then you are either talking to the Random and B could be either of the others or you are talking to the Knave/Knight and B is the other non-Random. We really don't know a whole lot here, just that B is not Random. Worst case scenario. We'll come back to this in a moment.
If No, then you are talking to the Random. Neither Knight nor Knave will ever answer this question with a No. Proceed to ask B "Would C say you are the Knave?" This guarantees you are being lied to, just like the first challenge. Just switch the answers and use your last question to find out if there's a nice place to get a drink nearby.
If anything else, you are talking to either the Knave/Knight and B is the Random. Neither the Knight nor the Knave can answer this question with a yes or no, because they don't know if they would be lying or telling the truth. In that case, guarantee you are being lied to and go enjoy that drink.
Worst case scenario Question 2: We know B is non-Random in this scenario, so who better to ask? Let's try that same trick again. "Would A say he is certain he could predict C's answer, if A knew what I was going to ask C?"
What does B answer? If yes, then both A and B are non-Random. Use your last question to guarantee you are being lied to.
If no, then you did something very wrong. This should not be a possible answer.
If anything else, then A is the Random. Ask B about C for the Phobos Guarantee and go home.
Convoluted? You bet. Effective, though.
As for the third riddle, word play is less my thing. I prefer the logic puzzles. I might take a look at it later, though.
-Phobos, master strategist and professional Knave
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
Very impressed with this solution. It seems you are really good with these logic puzzles. In that case, let's try this one for good measure:
You are on an island populated by knights and knaves. Knights always tell the truth; knaves always lie. You meet a inhabitant of the island who you know is holding up either 1, 2, or 3 fingers behind his back. You don’t know if this inhabitant is a knight or a knave. By asking two yes-or-no questions, determine how many fingers the inhabitant has behind his back.
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
Both correct on the first one, but Hardric is wrong on the second one.
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
A mountain and a map.
Spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler
The first one is a mountain, and the second one ... a desert ?
Oh, but this one is so boringly simple! The answer, is Nothing. The sheer number of "nothing" riddles is astonishing.
Shall we play another game of riddles, PPC? I think we shall. I'll start you off simple.
I roll, but I am not round.
I roar, but I have no mouth.
I crack, but I am not fragile.
I have a deadly companion, yet I am feared more than he.
He strikes, but has no hands.
He always arrives before I do.
Who am I, and who is my companion?
Spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler
Hope that's enough.
Anyway, the answer is Thunder and Lightning.
... If we're doing this again, I don't suppose Hal Jordan is around, is he? We had such a nice moment the last time. ○^_^○
~Neshomeh
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
You are Thunder and your companion is Lightning.
That was rather easy though, I think. What else have you got?
Oh, you want a challenge, do you? Well then. I can oblige. But not quite yet. Another, simpler one. Though more difficult then the last.
There is a story that a man and not a man
Saw and did not see a bird and not a bird
Perched on a branch and not a branch
And hit him and did not hit him with a rock and not a rock.
How is this possible?
You'll have to let me know if it's any good or not. {= )
I swim in the sea. I am an eater, though I do not hunger. Too few of me, and the sea will die; too many of me, and the sea will die. Who am I?
~Neshomeh (no this is not the answer)
... is 'an oxygen atom'. Dissolved oxygen is present in the sea, is the ultimate 'eater' (in that most forms of destruction come back to 'combining with oxygen'), will kill the sea by either too little (suffocating the critters) or too much (oxygen toxicity, away!).
But this answer is obviously wrong, since I'm saying it since you said (later) 'animal'.
hS
PS: Spoiler attempt in white goes here: You are a white blood cell. Or a platelet, even. Or a red blood cell; frankly, any component of blood fits the description. But I'm going with white. That was longer than I expected. ~hS
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
Could it be salt ? I mean, it corrodes things, without salt no sea, and too much salt... Well, they call the Dead Sea this way for a reason.
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
Could it be plankton ? The first step of the food chains in the ocean, and I guess an excess of them could hurt with an excess of carbon released in one zone of the ocean.
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
Zooplankton are animals, but they eat 'cause they need calories like any hungry thing.
The designation "animal" might be is slightly misleading. Here's a proper hint (highlight to read): what "sea" am I really talking about? {= )
~Neshomeh
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
Must admit I saw Huinesoron's take on the answer, and in my opinion it fits. White blood cell "eat" the bacteria, but are not complex enough for hunger, they are organisms, the lack of them... well AIDS is a glaring example, and an excess of them, for example after a transplant will kill the patient.
Hardric, too much curious.
Phew. I was starting to worry my logic was too twisted, or the answer was too obscure. ^_^; I figured this group would get there eventually, though. What do you think, is it good enough to share around?
Also, here's another one, with a false rhyme, even:
First I was a stranger, then I was a brother.
Now I am an outcast, but secretly a lover.
Who am I?
Hint in white text: Inspired by recent science news that was shared on the Board. End hint.
~Neshomeh
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
Could it be Pluto? An unknown planet for a very long time, who was then banished from this little club several years ago ?
"I eat, though I do not hunger" suggests to me this is not some sort of aquatic animal. I think I'll take that a step further and say it isn't an organism of any sort.
Instead, something acidic, I'd wager. Is it CO2?
perhaps thinking a little too hard. {= ) The answer to "animal, vegetable, or mineral?" would certainly have to be animal.
~Neshomeh
Hm. My first thought was something along the lines of blue-green algae, but that might be taking it too literally.
Also, while you're here - I hope you're feeling better and that the dragon RP might get going again. I mean, ngl, it was all just so cute. Just wall-to-wall cute. =]
I am, thanks, and I might! I'd convinced myself it was too late (having previously worked myself into a real state over how badly I'd screwed it all up and maybe shouldn't even have started it to begin with, but I'm better now)—but if y'all want to, it would be nice to wrap it up and put a bow on top. {= )
Re. the riddle, yep, that's a tad too literal. I am heartened that it wasn't instantly transparent and super-easy for you. {= )
~Neshomeh
Precisely how you think you screwed it up, considering it was so fluffy and cute and heartwarming that even the bloody NOTARY got a sweet moment or two. Whatever you decide, though, I enjoyed the RP immensely and feel privileged to have been part of it. =]
I'll e-mail the details. I'd actually really like to talk about it, but I don't wanna dump my neuroses on this fun riddle thread. {= )
~Neshomeh
You may find me at... well, actually, I think you've got my email address. You certainly betaed my first mission, so maybe it's still lurking. If you can't find it, it is harry heath 99 at that email service where the mail is hot.
My son is crying in the woods, I can't see him, only hear him.
I do admit, I am rusty on these style riddles. So different are they from many European formats I am so used to.
This one is a classic. To assist our fellow westerners, I shall say this: This is not so much a logic puzzle, as a metaphor.
The answer to this one is:
The wind.
I shall respond in turn:
Three people stand near a river they have to ford. The first one, after a closer look around, crosses it. The second one looks at the riverbank and at the water, but does not cross it. The third one does not see the river and does not cross it. Who are the three?
The first person is a woman, an expectant mother to be exact. The second person is the child the mother carries on her back. And the third person is the mother's unborn child.
Am I close?
If the wind is your son, then that makes you some sort of supernatural being like a god or goddess. You should be able to use your supernatural powers to see the wind.
(Or are African deities traditionally unable to see their own children?)
Things are often described as family members. Another example would be:
I have many children who run after each other, but never overtake each other.
The children in this context are the spokes of a wheel. Nobody is suggesting that the speaker's offspring are cartwheel spokes, merely that cartwheel spokes remain in the same place as the wheel turns.
...so that metaphor makes sense.
What is the wind's metaphorical parent supposed to be? And what is its connection to the wind?
So why does it have to be the wind?
Try this riddle then, and see if you can make sense of it:
My hen has laid an egg on thorns.
A pineapple perhaps?
These African riddles vexed me at first. The answers made absolutely no logical sense, at least by any logic with which I am familiar, but I think I have figured out the way I need to think to solve them.
My answer is a rosebud in a rose bush.
Then I will stay the plant course. If it is not a rosebud, then perhaps a cactus?
Rosebud is definitely closer to the answer than cactus.
If the answer were an acacia flower. {= ) They're yellow like an egg, aren't they? Or, well, can be. There's like a million varieties of them.
Alternatively, the egg (read: white round thing) is the moon and the thorns (read: tiny points) are stars?
~Neshomeh
Nice ideas, though. =]
It's a thing Jonathan Strange hates
A little hint, before the reveal: this is a descriptive riddle.
Or, rather, a sun symbol: a circle surrounded by pointy rays.
Then I realized, that was an actual logical deduction, rather then narrative trickery. However, despite heading in the right direction, you are nowhere near the answer.
You are on the right path of logic though. I will give you one more guess, before I (or Scapegrace, she has my permission) reveal the answer.
The head wearing it is the egg, and the pointy metal bits are the thorns. (OTOH I'm not sure what the hen is, so it's probably wrong.)
Spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler
There is no hen. The hen doesn't matter; it's just a vehicle for creating the image of an egg within thorns. Same way the "son" doesn't matter in the other one; it's just a way of setting up the metaphor of the wind "crying" in the trees.
I think figuring out which bit of the setup to disregard in these African riddles is analogous to figuring out where the pun is in a lot of Western riddles.
~Neshomeh
Then again, it's an intrinsically funny word for me. =]
The first is a pregnant woman, who searches for a safe place. The second is her child, who she carries on her back. The third is her unborn child.
Have one from the Yoruba tradition:
Ancient ditch of my father
Ancient ditch of my father
If a small young person enters it, it reaches his neck
If an elderly person enters it, it reaches his neck
How rude of me. I was puzzled for a while though. The "Ancient ditch of my father" threw me off. However, once I came back to my senses, the answer was simple.
Oh, yes, a solution warning for those who wish to solve the riddle for themselves. This should be sufficient.
A garment, such as a shirt.
A couple more for you:
"My short grandfather overthrew my tall grandfather"
(Fulani)
"A lake that has reeds all around"
(Luo)
And finally, another more metaphorical one:
The great packer of loads, king among divinities
He packs two hundred yams with a groundnut shell
He sends people to tell those in his house
That he is just learning how to pack loads
(Yoruba)
One of the components of Yoruba culture is oriki, or praise poetry, wherein the achievements of someone are aggrandised and embellished beyond measure. This is relevant to the riddle.
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
Short grandfather/tall grandfather:
An ant toppling a plant.
Packer of loads:
A pig.
And I think you're on the right lines with the other. =]
... is 'a gerbil'.
It's a metaphor.
Well, three metaphors.
hS
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
It is an eye, and the reeds are lashes.
If the child crosses on the mother's back, that's still crossing it!
No wonder African riddles never caught on over here if they're all like this!
...or find itself carried over it?
Sorry, but I seem to prefer the Western tradition of riddles that actually make sense.
But, if you're looking literally, the child does not cross by himself. His mother does the crossinng, but he's only carried on her back, he does nothing (African riddles are like demons and Faes it seems, the letter supercedes the spirit.)
The one who sees but does not cross is a tree.
The one who crosses the ford is it shadow.
The one who does nothing is a stone.
One that would grant many smiles. And, yet, not the answer I seek.
Read further only if you need a hint:
Think along the lines of the Riddle of the Sphinx
Once I saw Scape's answer and I did the comparaison (I really should stop refreshing the page during this sort of game ^^).
(The wolf, of course, can swim.)
hS
It it because you're blind ?
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
I can only hear the wind going through the leafs. I can't see him because he's dead.
It's much rarer for African riddles to be phrased as a question; generally, they're a bit more of a gnomic utterance kinda deal. The one I posted is a traditional Swahili riddle. =]
There are trees in the way. Your son is in the woods; you aren't. You need to go in to be able to see him. That's why we call it 'looking for' someone, see?
Or don't see, if you're still hanging around outside the forest.
(You do remember MacGyver hS, right? I'm gonna be here breaking all your (plural) riddles until it's time to leave. >:D)
hS
"My son is crying in the woods, I cannot see him, only hear him". At no point is it implied that I am not in the woods; merely that my son cannot be seen.
I write the Notary, I think I can out-Rules Lawyer a bloke whose primary characteristic was getting locked in sheds full of things he needed to get out. =]
It is only implied that you cannot see him. The most logical solution to that is that you are looking in the wrong place.
But if you want illogical solutions:
You are an alien from Tau Ceti d, with 27 eyes atop each of your 9 legs. While escorting your son-cousin (so designated due to him only having seven legs, each of course with 19 eyes) to a garden party (the plants in Cetian gardens throw the best parties), you dropped him over a waterfall. The predatory trees in the pool at the bottom devoured three of his legs, and you had to sacrifice all of your eyes to regrow them. To disguise his shame, he has donned a robe of woven branches, and now circles your head weeping his acidic tears in an effort to prompt your amputated eyes to regrow.
He is crying. He is, idiomatically, 'in the woods' out of shame. You cannot see (him or anything else). You cannot feel his tears (obviously, because your legs have no nerve endings). You can only hear him on your tympanic membranes.
hS (who didn't adopt the name himself, anyway)
And how they're not generally phrased as questions?
You're taking this waaaay too literally.
SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS
African riddles of this nature are more metaphors than the word games common in Western riddles. Compare and contrast the mu-koan, though traditional African riddles are generally less abstruse; they are, after all, part of an oral history tradition, not an exercise in self-contemplation.
As our question mark-wearing friend further up the thread put it, the answer is "the wind". The son is not there and I am not looking for him; all I am hearing is the cry of the wind between the branches.
You don't get to make a vague statement and then say the interpretation of it is wrong. Otherwise this counts as a riddle:
~I am blue. What am I?~
The only correct answer I will accept is 'the lid of a jar of Morrisons peanut butter'. All your other answers are wrong, because I say so.
hS, causing entirely deliberate trouble
The crunchy peanut butter has a red top. =]
((Gosh, is doing stuff like this deliberately always this fun? =]))
For he is tricky, and throws all forms of allegory and tangential logic streams into a rational, reasonable riddle, and ruins the entire exercise. One of these days, I will have to put him against some of my greater riddles in person. See how his fruit rebellion fares then...
Spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler spoiler etc.
This one is a bit tougher, but I think I've sorted it out (many thanks to my Skype friend for inadvertently planting the seed of this solution.)
There is not one, but two stories, one of a man and one of "not a man", which could instead be a child or a woman.
These two stories would go as follows:
There is a story that a man
Saw a bird
Perched on a branch
And hit him with a rock.
There is a story that not a man
Did not see not a bird
Perched on not a branch
And did not hit him with not a rock.
...that did not pay off. No, this is, indeed, the same story. Think on it some more.
((If you just cannot beat it and give up, look at the my response to Iximaz. I believe in you, though!))
Unfortunately, I've gone and ruined it for myself already. Curse my wandering eyes.
I don't think I'd have figured that out any time soon. My mind was on the completely wrong track, assuming that all factors of the story had to be empirically true. I suppose that's a drawback of literal thinking.
Still, if you are of a literal mind, perhaps you will enjoy my mathematics based riddles! However, now is not the time. We must play the game proper, no? Let us give more people a chance to answer first.
Well, we'll see how long you stay around once the Justice League shows up. Hal Jordan had better watch himself, though.
Anyway, until they show up, I might as well match wits with you. So let me tell you a story.
A man was looking at his reflection in a lake. He saw the reflection of a bird on the reflection of a branch. He decided to throw a rock (and thus the reflection of said rock) which hit the bird's reflection in the lake.
Am I getting close?
-Phobos
Surely, they will see some reason!
You are actually nowhere near the answer. I do have to say, very clever. But no, not at all what I am looking for.
A crossdresser with bad eyesight saw a bat on a twig and threw something that looked like a rock at it, but missed?
*flails around with her Wild Mass Guessing Stick*
Amazingly close. Not there yet, though. But very near to it.
((For those who do want to solve it legitimately, do not read any farther. This is a very clever riddle, one that I hope you would choose to solve on your own.))
((This riddle was created by Plato. That's how you know it's good. Anyway, the answer is:
A eunuch (castrated man) who did not see well saw a bat perched on a reed and threw a pumice stone at him which missed.))
((I said you were close, Ix!))
Spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers spoilers
Thunder and lightning! Or, alternately, a storm. :)
Apologies to Voyd for stealing his SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER ... and so on.
The answer is nothing.
The wise and knowledgeable man is sure of nothing.
The fool knows nothing.
The rich man wants nothing.
The greatest of heroes fears nothing.
The lowliest of cowards would die for nothing.
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
The answer is "nothing." A wise man is sure of nothing, a fool knows nothing, a rich man wants nothing, a hero fears nothing, a coward would die for nothing.
