Test Yourself: The Married Problem - 80% Get Wrong?

[Infinitum]

The YouTuber who posted the video (an awesome mathematician, btw) has a friend who works for the Guardian who posted this puzzle. Out of a poll of over 200,000 people only 4.55% answered no. Really puts that into perspective
https://www.theguardian.com/science...the-logic-question-almost-everyone-gets-wrong

Those are rather interesting statistics!

The only answer I have for that is perhaps, just perhaps, Jack is glancing at George with his peripheral vision

Yes, you cannot really determine the answer.

Yes, maybe Anne is a cat. And maybe this is in opposite-land where "yes" means "no" and "married means unmarried".

I concur.

You don't see letters to mathematical journals saying "This proof is wrong, because when I use the word 'square', I mean a polygon with seven sides!"

If I understand correctly, mathematical research is built on axioms and definitions that are quite precisely defined, or previous research/context related to the topic is concretely referenced to. In this case, neither the context of the problem, nor its characters, was defined.

We (or I should rather say, I) are/am looking at this as a logical puzzle, and by syllogism, one cannot derive the "supposed answer" from the given premises.

As the post referenced to by @ProfuselyQuarky says,

Why is this question so tricky? It is because it appears to give you insufficient information.

That is partly what I am trying to convey, as it does give (some) people insufficient information which is not the assumption about the marital status of Anne, but something beyond, because the fact that the martial status is immaterial given the "usual assumptions" is fairly obvious (to me), as I already suggested. That is at which point I actually started thinking about possibilities. It was on second thought, that I chose (C).

In any case, I was asked to share my reasoning, and I appear to have made my point, so I don't believe there is any necessity to go on about this further.

 

[ProfuselyQuarky]

In any case, I was asked to share my reasoning, and I appear to have made my point, so I don't believe there is any necessity to go on about this further.

Ah, yes. This riddle has been beaten to death.

I must now leave, in search for another riddle to entertain myself with. Tally-ho!

 

[Vanadium 50]

I don't believe that the 80% who got this wrong did so because they thought Anne was a cat. I just don't.

This can be solved systematically.

A. Jack, Anne and George are either married or unmarried. This is where the cats and rats and elephants and opposite-land come in, and I don't believe that the 80% who got this wrong disagree with this statement.

B. There are eight possibilities: for Jack, Anne and George, these are the possible states. (M=married, U=unmarried) For each of the 8 possibilities, I write down the answer to the question "Is a married person looking at an unmarried person?"

1. MMM - N
   
2. MMU - Y
   
3. MUM - Y
   
4. MUU - Y
   
5. UMM - N
   
6. UMU - Y
   
7. UUM - N
   
8. UUU - N

D. "Jack is married" excludes possibilities 5,6,7 and 8. "George is not" excludes possibilities 1,3,5 and 7. That leaves 2 and 4 as possibilities, and both of those have the same answer to the given question: "yes".

You can see from the table a number of variations, for example: "Jack is looking at Anne, but Anne is looking at George. Not everyone is married, but Jack is. Is a married person looking at an unmarried person?

 

[Infinitum]

I don't believe that the 80% who got this wrong did so because they thought Anne was a cat. I just don't.

I do not believe that most people considered the possibility of a cat/elephant/whatever, either. As I speculated before, it probably has to do with the nature of assumptions we are likely to make. And we are likely correct in that regard. Logical puzzles are considered tricky because they usually delude us into making seemingly obvious assumptions (or the lack of such assumptions, as in the case of this question).

However, I believe we differ in the opinion whether the "supposed answer" is truly correct given the (very liberal) premises.

This can be solved systematically.

Given your assumptions, that is a neat solution indeed

 

[ProfuselyQuarky]

cat/elephant/whatever

I think you forgot to mention my beloved capybara, but nevermind, I’m just trying to give you a hard time

 

[Evo]

Good puzzle ProfuselyQuarky! My doctor said the meds I'm on would cause cognitive problems, boy was she right. Yes one assumption about Anne solves the question.

 

[gjonesy]

The only answer I have for that is perhaps, just perhaps, Jack is glancing at George with his peripheral vision

George maybe blind, and or distracted? If George would just look at jack wed have a solid answer.

My speculation was that people who considered multiple interpretations, automatically searched through enough interpretations to notice the answer could possibly be either "Yes" or "No" depending on the interpretation, and hence stick to (C) instead

I think its the margin of error. If your reasoning is that a solid indisputable fact about Anne can not be established (species, genus, or if she is a robot) then you have to pick C because it affords you a plausible correct answer.

After extensive reading I still must stick to the original answer, YES, a married person is looking at an unmarried person. Simply because of the terms used married and unmarried. Even if Anne's marital status could be established as separated. Which in my state would nullify the marriage contract to a certain extent there would still be "technically" a married person looking at an unmarried person.

Jack married + Anne either married, unmarried or (separated= married and single) + George who is single= YES

Using the term married and unmarried established 2 humans in the mix, I can say with a 50/50 chance that the answer is YES

 

[Pepper Mint]

George is a transgender. His previous name was Anne.
Jack is looking at Anne.
Anne is/was looking at George.
There is no Anne now, so Jack is actually looking at George.

 

[ProfuselyQuarky]

George is a transgender. His previous name was Anne.
Jack is looking at Anne.
Anne is/was looking at George.
There is no Anne now, so Jack is actually looking at George.

That is . . . brilliant