?

Log in

The Dan
zerodan
.:.. .::...:. :.: : .::::: ..:.::..


March 2009
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31

The Dan [userpic]
15q logical thinking test

http://www.think-logically.co.uk/lt.htm

I am pleased that I scored 100% on my first try, though I suspect most (if not all) of you will do the same.

Moody?: busybusy
Comments

100%

That was amusing... now to get picky.

I can't decide, but I feel #10 is ambiguous enough to be wrong.

"Paris is in New Zealand." is not the same thing as
"Paris is wholely contained within New Zealand"

So if we answer this as a question posed on set membership (as implied by 'in') we have a problem. (Thus assuming Paris is a set not a element which is also part of the problem here)

As a logic statement:

There exists no x in Paris that is not also in New Zealand.
or
All members of Paris are members of New Zealand

rather than:

There exists an x in Paris in that is also in New Zealand.

Re: That was amusing... now to get picky.

The other obvious example is of course something like:

Rome is in Italy.
Rome is in Ohio.

Which we can represent as a graph in a logically constant manner.

Rome
|--> Italy
'--> Ohio

(Ok, I _thought_ I was done being picky... I wasn't)

:)

Re: That was amusing... now to get picky.

Lol.
So I guess someone didn't get 100%?
;)

Re: That was amusing... now to get picky.

I did get 100% but I totally agree that a few of the questions employed assumptions.

Aargh. I missed the last two. I should have gotten #14 right, but I take issue with #15.