> How is the host supposed to evaluate the future? I don't see how "evaluation of the future" is relevant. The person hosting the game has laid out the conditi

> How is the host supposed to evaluate the future? I don't see how "evaluation of the future" is relevant. The person hosting the game has laid out the conditions for his actions. If you say "you will not give me prize B in response to this statement": 1) If the host were to give you prize B, that would be a contradiction, as that would make your statement false, so you should have received C. 2) If the host were to give you prize C, that would be a contradiction, as that would make your statement true; per the rules, you should not have received prize C (or logically equivalent: you should have received one of A or B). 3) If the host were to give you prize A, there is no contradiction. The only action the host can make, while honoring the rules they laid out, is to give you prize A. The host, assuming they're decent at logic (which is a premise of such problems), would consider the above and realize that they must give you prize A. There's no need for reading the future; they must merely know what actions they are permitted to make given the rules of the game, and given only one valid course of action, they must take take that action.