Here is how I interpreted it. INTERPRETATION 1 Consider only the part of the question colored in orange. The answer to this phrase is obviously all 6 faces of the cube. Then we place an additional constraint on it (the remaining part of the sentence that's not orange). Call the edges of the cube [sideA, sideB, sideC, sideD, sideE, sideF] wlog. Consider sideA; does it share an edge with any one other face? Yes (pick any one of the four faces that are adjacent to it). Consider sideB; does it share an edge with any one other face? Yes. ... Consider sideF; does it share an edge with any one other face? Yes. Count all the faces that qualify under the constraint the orange part of the sentence is placed under and you will get the original 6 - just if there was no constraint. Here's how the solutions interpreted it: INTERPRETATION 2 Consider any one face of a cube (sideA, sideB, sideC, sideD, sideE, or sideF). How many faces are adjacent to it? 4. Why is INTERPRETATION 1 fallacious?