Post by Korbaine Geroki sen Tekaevish on Apr 2, 2008 23:30:45 GMT -5
Kiara, that was my very first answer...
Since your line-of-reasoning exhibits the idea that any number of the children higher than 3.5 would still present the same solution, my answer was correct, since it encompassed all numbers greater than 3.5 while still being under the limit of seven.
_______________________
Kiara, I think that the answer to your most recent riddle might refer either to the individual referred to in the second person in the riddle (people in general, I assume), who are unable to see themselves unless looking directly into a reflective surface. At the same time, it might refer to a more specific part of a person, such as the eyes or face.
korbaine said:
Kiara, I would guess that at least four of them are boys, and since 3.5 is less than four, it is still a true statement.Since your line-of-reasoning exhibits the idea that any number of the children higher than 3.5 would still present the same solution, my answer was correct, since it encompassed all numbers greater than 3.5 while still being under the limit of seven.
_______________________
Kiara, I think that the answer to your most recent riddle might refer either to the individual referred to in the second person in the riddle (people in general, I assume), who are unable to see themselves unless looking directly into a reflective surface. At the same time, it might refer to a more specific part of a person, such as the eyes or face.
