Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Herer
Well, logically, if the third man were further down the coast than the second, the likelihood of his hearing him, and my not doing so is slim. Thus implying, that the third is therefore lying, and must be the savage. This means, then, that the second, because he was closer to the first man, and went out of the way to remark on the first man, positively. He must therefore be a noble. Also, as the second man did not remark that the first was a savage, despite the first's answer that he was a noble, the first must be a noble as well.
|
You could also say the complete flip. The third man might have been too far to hear the first, but he may have heard the second make the remark about the first, and the claim the second made about being a noble. The third man can very well be a noble, and the first two savages.
And you did say the third man answered friendly. Where there was no context of how the first two answered. Since Nobles are kind you could assume the third one was truly a noble lol. I dunno.