pop quiz game

Well if the barber shaves himself then he does not follow his own rule, because he shaves those who do not shave themselves.

............
does this fit in the quetion categorys?
4 choice answer
true or false
elimination

Ask easier questions?

SilensCaelum wrote:

Well if the barber shaves himself then he does not follow his own rule, because he shaves those who do not shave themselves.

either he doesn't shave or there is a second barber

If the barber does not shave then he would have to shave because the barber shaves everyone who does not shave themselves. Another Barber could not shave the original barber because that would mean that the original barber does not shave himself, therefore he would have to shave himself.



EDIT:
@ Waaar
-Easy questions are no fun.

SilensCaelum wrote:

If the barber does not shave then he would have to shave because the barber shaves everyone who does not shave themselves. Another Barber could not shave the original barber because that would mean that the original barber does not shave himself, therefore he would have to shave himself.



EDIT:
@ Waaar
-Easy questions are no fun.

i say his mom shaves it =P or his dad (some sort of relitive)

SilensCaelum wrote:

If a barber shaves everyone who does not shave themselves, who shaves the barber?

Is the barber a female?

The barbers gender is irrelevant. ;P

SilensCaelum wrote:

The barbers gender is irrelevant. ;P

Is the barber in any condition where he would NEED shaving?

the barber is a robot

well the barber gets shaved so he has to be a man or a wman with hair lol.


I say a client that comes there gets shaved by the barber and shves him in return.

waaar81 wrote:

well the barber gets shaved so he has to be a man or a wman with hair lol.


I say a client that comes there gets shaved by the barber and shves him in return.

but that means that the barber didn't shave himself, which would mean that he would have to shave himself, since he shave EVERYONE who does not shave themselves..... meaning that he would shave himself, making this impossible.......

Wow Skye, tough one.

SmashedBrother wrote:

but that means that the barber didn't shave himself, which would mean that he would have to shave himself, since he shave EVERYONE who does not shave themselves..... meaning that he would shave himself, making this impossible.......

Wow Skye, tough one.

Correct SB. You got it, there is no answer to this question for it is a paradox!

Boy, that was fun.

ok here's a question:

imagine you are a train driver. you are going along a railway when all of a sudden you see three little kids playing on the track in front of you. on the left is an abandoned (but still usable) railway where there is one little child playing. you cannot stop the train or get a message to any of the kids because the train is going far too fast. you are heading towards the three children at great speed and will instantly kill them once they are hit. if you turn left you will kill the other litle child.
remember, you may think that killing the one child is better "for the greater good" but then you will be purposely killing a child and will have that death over your head forever. but if you don't kill that one child you will have killed three times that amount.
will you turn or not?

P.S. sorry smashed for sttealing your go but I couldn't wait...and let's face it, it's not anybody important right?
P.S.S. Skye is evil

firegremlin wrote:

P.S. sorry smashed for sttealing your go but I couldn't wait...and let's face it, it's not anybody important right?
P.S.S. Skye is evil

Is there a third track?

P.S. Don't worry, I'm used to Europeans stealing credit. It's all they've got and no, it's not like it's anyone important who took it.

P.S.2

SmashedBrother wrote:

firegremlin wrote:

P.S. sorry smashed for sttealing your go but I couldn't wait...and let's face it, it's not anybody important right?
P.S.S. Skye is evil

Is there a third track?

No, there is no third track.

I would just go straight where the train was supposed to be going. If it's going to fast and the railroad on the left might be usuable then judging by the speed the train might get off tracks ending off by killing everyone in the train.

Or an alternate thing would be to make that train noise and hope the kids will get off the tracks but since there isnt any time to warn the kids then there isnt any time to turn left plus the rails have to change and someone has to do it cuz you cant make a train turn left or right. It goes where the rails take them .

waaar81 wrote:

I would just go straight where the train was supposed to be going. If it's going to fast and the railroad on the left might be usuable then judging by the speed the train might get off tracks ending off by killing everyone in the train.

Or an alternate thing would be to make that train noise and hope the kids will get off the tracks but since there isnt any time to warn the kids then there isnt any time to turn left plus the rails have to change and someone has to do it cuz you cant make a train turn left or right. It goes where the rails take them .

but if yuo just go straight then you will be killing three children. that is the right answer but your reasoning is wrong

no its not.
You dont have any choice. You cant decide where the train goes. Someone has to change the rails so that you can access the left railroad and if yo udont have enough time to warn the kids then you dont have enough time to let the rail man know to make the train go to the left. Plus you may end up killing more people while trying to kill less. you r gonna kill someone and there is no way to stop it. Its like will you take the chance to kill 1 child instead of 3 but you have a 99% chnace of killing 200 more people in the process including your self.

Im sorry but my reasonning is not wrong at all. And most of the governement and real life works this way. Its not like in the American movies, where the hero always saves the day with minimum deaths. Life is bout hard choices and you need to use logic for that

well ok, I suppose that works but what I was looking for was that:

Technically it IS ok to kill the three children instead of the one. This is becasue even though there is only one of the child, he or she was playing on an abandoned railway and so he or she was doing the right thing. however, the other three children were playing on a railway in use and most likely knew that, but instead decided to ignore it. so, the one child was doing the right thing and should surely be allowed to live because of that.
next we wonder, if the railway to the right (or left, I forget) really was abandoned then it must've been abandoned for a reason, such as unstability. so, if the train driver was to turn right (or left) then he or she could've crashed the train, possible killing some (if not all) of the passengers.

Well IM sorry but the first part of your reasoning makes less sense then mine lol. But I agree with the second part

guys this is multiple choice questions only... post a different thread for those kind of questions please...

@Waaar - POST A NEW QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

sorry guys dont have any questions in mind right now
I'll pas my turn to anyone who has one

what is/was mario's first occupation?

plumber