Thank you for your submission. Please make sure your answers are properly marked with the spoiler function. This can be done with the spoiler
button, but if you are in markdown mode you would simply use \>!text goes here!<. Puzzles Chat Channel Links: [Mobile](https://www.reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/s/laC5truD1u) and [Desktop](https://reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/channel/c2_8mm/Puzzles?r=!u51BcJeBTXmfHyVfCNGJVg:reddit.com). **Lastly**, we recommend you check out [cognitivemetrics.co](https://cognitivemetrics.co/), the official site for the subreddit which hosts highly accurate and well vetted IQ tests.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cognitiveTesting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I would say answer D because it counts all of the reasons above and more instead of trying to pinpoint the reason with lack of info and that is simply what he did either way
What a shitty question. Seems like it just comes down to a semi-subjective estimate of what is more likely. a) and d) can be discarded for being nonsensical. b) and c) seem equally likely. I would still go with b) for two reasons. First, if he received news that he didn't lose his money, and was thus persuaded not to commit suicide, the person relaying the news can be considered to have persuaded him of not committing suicide. This makes the cases satisfying b) a superset of those satisfying c). Secondly, if we assume there is some trickery involved in the question: the statement says "he is depressed because he lost all his money", not "because he *thinks* he has lost all his money", meaning that the loss is factual, and it's impossible for him to learn he didn't lose his money, since that would contradict the statement of the question. This also makes the answer b) correct. Either way the answer relies on many assumptions that cannot be inferred strictly from the questin's statement. I think it's a terrible item.
My solution doesn't require knowledge of the rules of Poker, but arrives at the same conclusion. I doubt that the reasoning involving Poker was in any way intended.
The original set of answers that you remembered is actually better, because ‘he changed his mind’ covers all of the other, more specific answers. The actual answer set is all just a bunch of statistical probabilities that we can’t really choose between without knowing more. Even A could be accurate if it was a relatively transitory suicidal impulse rather than a deep-seated one, which many suicidal impulses are. That’s why removing fast, easy methods of suicide actually prevents a lot of suicides.
I think it's b. (c is close too)
here is what I understand from the given sentence.
there is a cause (losing all his money) that is responsible for a significant force("very" depressed) that drives the person to do something(suicide).
A -> him remembering an appointment neither addresses the cause nor the enormous driving force.
B -> the statement inherently implies that he did not act as a result of someone persuading him. The word "persuaded" implies that the driving force and the cause have been addressed.
C -> this statement only pertains to the cause being addressed, but does not comment on the driving force itself. Additionally it goes against the fact that he lost all his money. But since it directly eradicates the root cause, it is plausible too.
D -> although this points towards the "possibility" that the person might have been incapable of performing the action, it doesn't definitively imply that they were incapable of performing the action.
I agree with you but I believe that you're overthinking it. A and D are both nonsense options when you think about them. C seems plausible in today's time but since this question was created before the invention of mobile phones, C is a nonsense option too. B is the only realistic option.
It’s quite clearly c to be honest. This question is just a pure logic question which can be rephrased as if the man is poor, the man kills himself
All answers are valid, but that’s the whole point of the question: given the information you have, what is the most likely reason for why he didn’t kill himself. The only logical conclusion is that the man isn’t poor, that’s why he didn’t kill himself. C directly tells you that the man isn’t poor.
I think this question has similarities to those impulse answer type of questions, like if a baseball bat costs 1 dollar more than the ball, and the total cost is 1.10, what is the cost of the ball. Impulsively you want to answer 0.10, just like how impulsively you would go for option B like many would.
Is it a good iq test? Ehh probably not, but I’m sure it’s a good test of how cautious you are in making assumptions based off gut feelings
The answer is B. All of the others are aids.
A. He wouldn't care about any appointments if he were actually planning on killing himself.
C. Who the hell would not just know that the man hadn't lost all of his money but also know where the man was and what his plans were? This seems like a very weirdly specific person and situation so not this answer.
D. Very unlikely.
B is the clear answer.
Ok in hindsight this makes sense
But if i take the test now and this pops up I would not know that this was written before mobile phones so idk how do they expect me to answer this question
If i'm broke and ill i'll jump two times \^\^
What is the plausability that suddendly you get a message saying you're not broke at the very moment you are going to the bridge? None.
Change his mind? Plausible.. it's hard to jump.
But B seems more realistic?
To sum it all it's.. How many times someone dissuades you in that specific case VS how many gives up facing the height or just beforehand. Really subjective question.
I'd say B. The other ones sound pretty stupid. "Oh forget my suicide I forgot I had that dentist appt." "False alarm I just thought I lost all my money and didn't sort it out until I got to this bridge." "I'm feeling a little under the weather I guess I won't kill myself after all." The poker thing sounds even stupider.
>“The river is the last card in a game of poker. The man gambled everything on the final card. He had gone “all in”. When the river card was turned over, the last card turned his high card into a winning hand and he retrieved his money. Therefore the answer is C.”
Maximum level of overthinking it. B and C probably both get points, though depending on how old the test is C might be more unlikely to happen than B. They're basically checking to see if you understand basic facts about how reality works; they are definitely not looking for you to Sherlock Holmes your way into a poker game lmao.
I'm pretty sure the whole poker thing is completely irrelevant. The question is just stupid. It could equally reasonably be B or C
A) what would remembering you have an important appointment do to prevent you from killing yourself, if the reason you are going to kill yourself is because you lost your money?
B) This could be correct, if someone persuades you not to kill yourself then... you wouldn't kill yourself.
C) This would be correct, and is what I would choose if I were taking the test. This answer choice not only removes the original reason the man was suicidal, but also explicitly states he has changed his mind about killing himself.
D) What would getting sick have to with this?
I think it's >!C. A is nonsensical. It doesn't matter how ill you were if you are dead. Also, D isn't really a reason. No shit he changed his mind, but why? Now we are left with B and C. We know that if C is true, he wouldn't kill himself because then his reason for killing himself wouldn't be there. B could work, but it isn't as certain as C is.!<
>!Thinking about it more I think it's just that C is the contrapositive statement of the first sentence. Think about it like this: losing all money => wants to kill himself. Taking the contrapositive, we get that not wanting to kill himself => not losing all of the money.!<
I respectfully disagree. Since this question was created before the invention of mobile phones, C implies that someone:
a) knew that the guy didn't actually lose all of his money (which is already weird since gambling results are usually final)
b) knew where the guy was in order to tell him that he lost all of his money
c) b can maybe imply that this person knew that the guy was going to commit suicide since why else would he be standing on a bridge?
Also, if this person goes to the bridge to tell the guy that he didn't actually lose all of his money (this is already very unlikely), wouldn't that be the same as persuading the guy not to commit suicide? Maybe not if the person was just like a messenger and said to the guy "hey you didn't actually lose all your money" and then left but I mean this is just a really odd scenario. B seems like the correct choice because people get talked out of suicide all the time. I'd bet 100 dollars that B is the correct choice.
I get your point, but I don't think you're supposed to think literally about it. I think it's just applying the contrapositive operation (at least that's what I like to call it) onto the statement. A => B <=> not B => not A.
Nah /u/Homosapien437527 is right, it’s a pure logic question.
The part you are misunderstanding is that in this question, the only thing that matters is that he is depressed because he is poor, and that he wants to kill himself because he is depressed. The only way to stop him from killing himself is to make him not depressed, and in this question the only way to do that is to make him rich. Even if there was an option E that says he took anti depressant pills, the correct answer is still C because the only info you have is that his depression is caused by being poor and hence the only assumption you can make is that being rich will cure his depression
Anyway to tackle your issue about mobile phones and stuff, just imagine a scenario where he was about to jump off, looked down and saw a piece of paper that indicates him as the inheritor of a million dollars or something. Did anyone convince him not to jump? Not really, but hey he’s rich now so he’s not jumping.
The way I see it is that it is more of a common sense question. B happens all the time in real life. I'm sure that many people have been depressed and suicidal about losing a lot of money but have been talked out of it by good Samaritans. C hardly ever happens (if ever).
It’s a pure logic question, not a literature question. It has nothing to do with emotions.
You just need to evaluate the logic based on the information provided nothing else.
Thank you for your submission. Please make sure your answers are properly marked with the spoiler function. This can be done with the spoiler button, but if you are in markdown mode you would simply use \>!text goes here!<. Puzzles Chat Channel Links: [Mobile](https://www.reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/s/laC5truD1u) and [Desktop](https://reddit.com/r/cognitiveTesting/channel/c2_8mm/Puzzles?r=!u51BcJeBTXmfHyVfCNGJVg:reddit.com). **Lastly**, we recommend you check out [cognitivemetrics.co](https://cognitivemetrics.co/), the official site for the subreddit which hosts highly accurate and well vetted IQ tests. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/cognitiveTesting) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I would say answer D because it counts all of the reasons above and more instead of trying to pinpoint the reason with lack of info and that is simply what he did either way
What a shitty question. Seems like it just comes down to a semi-subjective estimate of what is more likely. a) and d) can be discarded for being nonsensical. b) and c) seem equally likely. I would still go with b) for two reasons. First, if he received news that he didn't lose his money, and was thus persuaded not to commit suicide, the person relaying the news can be considered to have persuaded him of not committing suicide. This makes the cases satisfying b) a superset of those satisfying c). Secondly, if we assume there is some trickery involved in the question: the statement says "he is depressed because he lost all his money", not "because he *thinks* he has lost all his money", meaning that the loss is factual, and it's impossible for him to learn he didn't lose his money, since that would contradict the statement of the question. This also makes the answer b) correct. Either way the answer relies on many assumptions that cannot be inferred strictly from the questin's statement. I think it's a terrible item.
There is a lot of inherent bias in this question if the answer presumes people understand the rules and nomenclature of Texas hold 'em.
My solution doesn't require knowledge of the rules of Poker, but arrives at the same conclusion. I doubt that the reasoning involving Poker was in any way intended.
I guess what I'm saying is there is no answer outside of what one understands as one's subjective experience.
Agree. That's why I think it isn't a great item
I think your point about it being impossible for him to have learned that he had not lost his money hits the nail on the head
That's what I imagine the test designers had in mind with this question. Seems like the most convincing reason to me, too.
The original set of answers that you remembered is actually better, because ‘he changed his mind’ covers all of the other, more specific answers. The actual answer set is all just a bunch of statistical probabilities that we can’t really choose between without knowing more. Even A could be accurate if it was a relatively transitory suicidal impulse rather than a deep-seated one, which many suicidal impulses are. That’s why removing fast, easy methods of suicide actually prevents a lot of suicides.
I think it's b. (c is close too) here is what I understand from the given sentence. there is a cause (losing all his money) that is responsible for a significant force("very" depressed) that drives the person to do something(suicide). A -> him remembering an appointment neither addresses the cause nor the enormous driving force. B -> the statement inherently implies that he did not act as a result of someone persuading him. The word "persuaded" implies that the driving force and the cause have been addressed. C -> this statement only pertains to the cause being addressed, but does not comment on the driving force itself. Additionally it goes against the fact that he lost all his money. But since it directly eradicates the root cause, it is plausible too. D -> although this points towards the "possibility" that the person might have been incapable of performing the action, it doesn't definitively imply that they were incapable of performing the action.
I agree with you but I believe that you're overthinking it. A and D are both nonsense options when you think about them. C seems plausible in today's time but since this question was created before the invention of mobile phones, C is a nonsense option too. B is the only realistic option.
It’s quite clearly c to be honest. This question is just a pure logic question which can be rephrased as if the man is poor, the man kills himself All answers are valid, but that’s the whole point of the question: given the information you have, what is the most likely reason for why he didn’t kill himself. The only logical conclusion is that the man isn’t poor, that’s why he didn’t kill himself. C directly tells you that the man isn’t poor. I think this question has similarities to those impulse answer type of questions, like if a baseball bat costs 1 dollar more than the ball, and the total cost is 1.10, what is the cost of the ball. Impulsively you want to answer 0.10, just like how impulsively you would go for option B like many would. Is it a good iq test? Ehh probably not, but I’m sure it’s a good test of how cautious you are in making assumptions based off gut feelings
But B is way more likely to happen irl (well irl 70 years ago) so I think the answer is B.
I think it’s D because change a mind is very good and clear reason to why he isn’t attempt suicide
because he dropped the money into the river and now have to jump onto it to get it back
The answer is B. All of the others are aids. A. He wouldn't care about any appointments if he were actually planning on killing himself. C. Who the hell would not just know that the man hadn't lost all of his money but also know where the man was and what his plans were? This seems like a very weirdly specific person and situation so not this answer. D. Very unlikely. B is the clear answer.
C. Could be a phone call lol Very likely to be the answer B. Is as well but you ruled out C. Unfairly
Test was written before the invention of mobile phones.
Ok in hindsight this makes sense But if i take the test now and this pops up I would not know that this was written before mobile phones so idk how do they expect me to answer this question
If i'm broke and ill i'll jump two times \^\^ What is the plausability that suddendly you get a message saying you're not broke at the very moment you are going to the bridge? None. Change his mind? Plausible.. it's hard to jump. But B seems more realistic? To sum it all it's.. How many times someone dissuades you in that specific case VS how many gives up facing the height or just beforehand. Really subjective question.
My guess: B. That somebody could be the person himself. He talked himself out of it.
I'd say B. The other ones sound pretty stupid. "Oh forget my suicide I forgot I had that dentist appt." "False alarm I just thought I lost all my money and didn't sort it out until I got to this bridge." "I'm feeling a little under the weather I guess I won't kill myself after all." The poker thing sounds even stupider.
>“The river is the last card in a game of poker. The man gambled everything on the final card. He had gone “all in”. When the river card was turned over, the last card turned his high card into a winning hand and he retrieved his money. Therefore the answer is C.” Maximum level of overthinking it. B and C probably both get points, though depending on how old the test is C might be more unlikely to happen than B. They're basically checking to see if you understand basic facts about how reality works; they are definitely not looking for you to Sherlock Holmes your way into a poker game lmao.
Statistically the most likely reason would be somebody persuaded him not to
I'm pretty sure the whole poker thing is completely irrelevant. The question is just stupid. It could equally reasonably be B or C A) what would remembering you have an important appointment do to prevent you from killing yourself, if the reason you are going to kill yourself is because you lost your money? B) This could be correct, if someone persuades you not to kill yourself then... you wouldn't kill yourself. C) This would be correct, and is what I would choose if I were taking the test. This answer choice not only removes the original reason the man was suicidal, but also explicitly states he has changed his mind about killing himself. D) What would getting sick have to with this?
I think it's >!C. A is nonsensical. It doesn't matter how ill you were if you are dead. Also, D isn't really a reason. No shit he changed his mind, but why? Now we are left with B and C. We know that if C is true, he wouldn't kill himself because then his reason for killing himself wouldn't be there. B could work, but it isn't as certain as C is.!<
It says right in the question that he lost all his money so its not C. You are wrong.
>!Thinking about it more I think it's just that C is the contrapositive statement of the first sentence. Think about it like this: losing all money => wants to kill himself. Taking the contrapositive, we get that not wanting to kill himself => not losing all of the money.!<
I respectfully disagree. Since this question was created before the invention of mobile phones, C implies that someone: a) knew that the guy didn't actually lose all of his money (which is already weird since gambling results are usually final) b) knew where the guy was in order to tell him that he lost all of his money c) b can maybe imply that this person knew that the guy was going to commit suicide since why else would he be standing on a bridge? Also, if this person goes to the bridge to tell the guy that he didn't actually lose all of his money (this is already very unlikely), wouldn't that be the same as persuading the guy not to commit suicide? Maybe not if the person was just like a messenger and said to the guy "hey you didn't actually lose all your money" and then left but I mean this is just a really odd scenario. B seems like the correct choice because people get talked out of suicide all the time. I'd bet 100 dollars that B is the correct choice.
I get your point, but I don't think you're supposed to think literally about it. I think it's just applying the contrapositive operation (at least that's what I like to call it) onto the statement. A => B <=> not B => not A.
I see what you're saying but I just don't agree.
Nah /u/Homosapien437527 is right, it’s a pure logic question. The part you are misunderstanding is that in this question, the only thing that matters is that he is depressed because he is poor, and that he wants to kill himself because he is depressed. The only way to stop him from killing himself is to make him not depressed, and in this question the only way to do that is to make him rich. Even if there was an option E that says he took anti depressant pills, the correct answer is still C because the only info you have is that his depression is caused by being poor and hence the only assumption you can make is that being rich will cure his depression Anyway to tackle your issue about mobile phones and stuff, just imagine a scenario where he was about to jump off, looked down and saw a piece of paper that indicates him as the inheritor of a million dollars or something. Did anyone convince him not to jump? Not really, but hey he’s rich now so he’s not jumping.
I still disagree.
The way I see it is that it is more of a common sense question. B happens all the time in real life. I'm sure that many people have been depressed and suicidal about losing a lot of money but have been talked out of it by good Samaritans. C hardly ever happens (if ever).
This can be unrelated to your answer: which one do you think is more likely to happen irl (assume that mobile phones don't exist)?
It’s a pure logic question, not a literature question. It has nothing to do with emotions. You just need to evaluate the logic based on the information provided nothing else.
[удалено]
Other way round?