Post by laughter on Sept 14, 2023 7:58:18 GMT -5
I think that's because those are thinkers trying to explain the irrationality of cognitive dissonance. I admit to my previous two failures in this regard.=========================================
"Listen here sonny. See. The missin' dollar is the money paid before the refund less the money paid after the refund less the part of the refund not refunded. Get it?"
(actually cracked myself up after reading that)
1 = 30 - 29
1 = 30 - (30 - 3) - 2
$1 = ("money paid" before refund : $30) - ("money paid" after refund: $27) - (part of refund not refunded: $2)
=========================================
That defines the illusion of the "missing dollar", working backwards. But it's a deconstruction. My guess is that the originators of the riddle didn't go through a rational process, and it likely popped into their minds as a single thought structure.
Here's my third attempt at a rational explanation of the cognitive dissonance. (here is a link to the original riddle, repeated in next post)
30 ≠ 29
30 - 5 + 3 + 2 ≠ 30 - 3 + 2
LHS: ("money paid" before refund : $30) - refund + (part of refund refunded: $3) + (part of refund not refunded: $2)
RHS: ("money paid" after refund: $27) + (part of refund not refunded: $2)
The part of our mind that does arithmetic cancels out the 5 = 3 + 2 on the left-hand side. And rightly so. What follows is a shell game on the definition of "money paid". It seems reasonable that the ("money paid" to the hotel guy before the refund) should equal the ("money paid" by the guests after the refund) + the (part of the refund kept by the bell hop).
It's a game of context on "money paid", with a bonus misdirection. The idea of "refund" is confused by partitioning it in such a way as to amplify the context shell game (part of refund refunded : $3 + part of refund not refunded : $2).
