Talk:George Boolos

Untitled
The following was presented by Boolos in the Harvard Review of Philosophy, 1996.

Three Gods, A B and C, are called, in some order, True False and Random. True always speaks truly, False always speaks falsely, but whether Random speaks truly or falsely is a completely random matter. Your task is to determine the identities of A, B and C by asking three yes-no questions; each question must be put to exactly one God. The Gods understand English, but will answer all questions in their own language, in which the words for 'yes' and 'no' are 'da' and 'ja', in some order. You do not know which word means which.

Now can anyone figure out the answer? (c; If anyone needs a hint, let me know on my talk page. - Eric Herboso 03:36, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * also available in Logic, Logic, and Logic, in case anyone finds it easier to looks for it there, under the title, "The Hardest Logic Problem in the World." The puzzle itself is credited to Raymond Smullyan, if I am not mistaken. (For the record, I don't think it's the hardest logic problem in the world, though it is a pretty good one.  And yes, I did solve it myself.  That strikes me as the best evidence that it's no that difficult: I'm just not that smart.) Captain Wacky 07:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 04:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Frege's Basic Law V
In the article, the 3rd paragraph of the section Work mentions Boolos' work on Frege's Grundgesetze and the influence of Russell's paradox on it. At the end, the sentence "The resulting system [Frege Arithmetic, i.e., Frege's logic of Grundgesetze with Basic Law V replaced with Hume's Principle] has since been the subject of intense work" has the tag. Would a reference to, for instance, Richard Heck's book Frege's Theorem (Book info // list of Heck's publications) — which discusses Frege Arithmetic almost exclusively — be considered as a suitable citation? YuujiSajaki (talk) 11:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)