Several of you have been messaging me (or posting in my timeline) about the flurry of news articles about this giraffe riddle. All the articles have spoiled it, so Im going to spoil it, too in my discussion of them and the riddle. Okay? Okay! I HAVE seen all the news articles! I really have! I think I disagree with them, though. Heres why: The riddle is a riddle. It is annoying, because riddles are often annoying. They are made to tease your brain and catch you out. Thats just how riddles are. If they were people, you would probably not want them at your parties because theyd be the super obnoxious know it all pedants who delight in calling out the mistakes of others. Thats part of why I rebelled against the giraffe picture thing. Im not into making people parade around feeling dumb. So my feeling is you have to take the riddle as seriously as it deserves to be taken, which is NOT SERIOUSLY. Its a silly game. You get it, or you dont, and if you dont, you probably gained some insight into how trick questions work. This is an extra tricky one because it knows that if you know how riddles work, you will realize you should not be distracted by the list of ingredients, and you will go back to the thing that might be opened before all of those. It also knows that having outsmarted that first trick, and found an obvious answer, youll stop there. This is why many of the people who answer it say the door. I also said door, but after consulting with Moss (who got it right away--as soon as he said the answer, before Id been told yes or no on my first guess, I knew it was right). I told the riddle giver that I changed my mind, and they gave me half credit for coming up with the right answer on the second try. But I did know Moss was right immediately, and I knew that the riddle had caught me out exactly where it had intended to. Its a riddle, and there fore treacherous and sly and annoying. We dont like to be wrong, generally. Thats why there are news articles trying to justify other answers. But the riddle assumes a fictional you who is asleep when the doorbell rings at 3am, who has living parents who would show up together at that hour and demand breakfast, and who opens their eyes first thing upon waking. It doesnt ask what youre going to open next. It asks what you open first. If it asked what you were going to open next, you would probably already have opened both your eyes *and* the door, because honestly, what were you doing? Shouting through the door to find out that your parents wanted breakfast? I suppose you could argue that you have a phone intercom system, but thats not whats implied. Maybe next time we all see a similar riddle, we wont get caught by that particular trap. Of course, knowing riddles, theyll level up to catch us out with an even trickier one. Also, I think this one is particularly insidious because it makes you feel triumphant if you didnt fall for the first trap (the ingredient list), and then it snatches that smugness right out from under you with the real answer. Which is unpleasant. But its not unfair. The riddle is consistent with its own internal logic. So. If its any consolation, I think you are all fun, interesting, and intelligent regardless of whether or not a riddle stumped you.
Posted on: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 19:45:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015