3 ms·
I always felt the answer to this question is both, since there is always yesterday and tomorrow as far as lunch is concerned, so everything by definition is bot
by ryao 1y ago
I always felt the answer to this question is both, since there is always yesterday and tomorrow as far as lunch is concerned, so everything by definition is both before and after lunch. Perhaps the question is ill formed and needs to ask if the time was before, during or after lunch, during the day of the timestamp while defining what during means. That would have a more normal answer.
- IAmBroom 1y agoThe question is clear. You are obfuscating it, for your own entertainment.
- ryao 1y agoIt is unclear to me. It has been ever since I was a child. This is what happens with periodicity. There is no 1 lunch reference point when you just say lunch in this sort of question.
- globular-toast 1y agoYou're not alone, believe me, but one of the things you have to learn at some point is that for the vast majority of the population the question is perfectly clear. This is an example of the midwit meme, something like this: IQ 55: it happened before lunch, IQ 100: "lunch" isn't a time, lunch for whom? And which lunch? Their first ever lunch? Do babies even have lunch? IQ 145: it happened before lunch.
- ryao 1y agoUsually, people with higher IQs are the ones who have trouble with such things. There is a logical difference between “before lunch” and “before lunch that day”. This is similar to how higher IQ individuals see the Monty hall problem as having a 2/3 probability rather than a 1/2 probability in the famous version of the problem posed to Marilyn vos Savant. They are often derided as being idiots for not having “common sense”, even when their remarks are correct. That said, IQ is considered obsolete given the theory of multiple intelligences. IQ only covers a subset of it.