Fork U

I just realized that it might not be clear that I am using the term guard to refer to one of the two robed people protecting access to the information we need.

This may not be true.  The two people may not have read or made the sign or know of the lying tendancies of their partner.  This would make it impossible for them to predict the other's guess.

Specious.

ask the truther what sign leads to the city and ask the lier if hes telling the truth. ha

thank you

if the truthers telling the truth that is

Ask either one of them to lead you to the City. The truth teller will naturally take you the right way. The liar should also take you the right way so as not to fall in the pit himself.

Why should we assume that the sign painter always tells the truth?

Just get on your cell phone, call the AAA in the city and ask them which path to take - DUH!

Pick 1 person and ask him....

Would the other person tell me that the left fork is the way to the city?

If the person you chose to ask is the truthful person and the left fork is the ...
   Correct path, the person will answer no. (truthful person tells liar will lie)
   Incorrect path, the person will answer yes. (truthful person tells liar will lie)

If the person you chose to ask is the liar and the left fork is the ...
   Correct path, the person will answer no. (liar lies about truthful person)
   Incorrect path, the person will answer yes. (liar lies about truthful person)

So, it doesn't matter whom you ask, if the answer about the left fork is NO, take the left fork; and if the answer is YES, take the right fork.
   

Hasn't anybody seen the Labyrinth with David Bowie. Integer had it right from the start. The Guard from the movie ask that very question and provides the same answer.

OK, I'll take your word for it. I'll be promising to wrap this first thing next month or when comments subside. As FYI:

There are at least three ways to answer this. For the basics, for a few points, the acceptable answer of course should be along the lines of the approach taken by integer and meintsi et al, treating it as a basic riddle.

What also could happen with the problem is discussing more philosophically, concerning the employment of the negative logic involved. I do not recall how that goes, but I grant that such an approach to the question could be acceptable. Perhaps something about multiple (double) negatives and their value, or not. This would follow what I meant by 'refutations'.

A third approach could be to provide a separate form of answer. While I go this way myself, that is not my original intent here, so onus is on commenter to do it well.

I see another approach above, to invalidate the question itself. Here again the onus on the commenter to do well.

Not knowing what kind of responses I'd get, my original intent could be construed as using those 1,2,3,4... in that order. Maybe I'd only get a single response.

> "of old riddle"

I am attempting to honor the traditional riddle, and not poke fun at it with a trick word or two of my own in the question itself. So if I misspoke or typo'd, that would need correction. I have no preconceived 'best answer' so I left it up to responders to sort that out.

> cell phone, call the AAA

I don't think those tools were among those "given". One 'given' was "old riddle". Just an FYI here on my intent, not my value system.

> "Hasn't anybody seen the"

Whether we saw or did not, Now how do we know whether THEY were truth-tellers or not?

>  using the term guard to refer to one of the two robed

I don't think that clarification was necessary. Maybe they are monks, maybe guards, I do not think their occupation is part of the problem. But I now see another place the comment could use clarification:

>> On the ground are two signs
> "they will both point to the incorrect sign"

Where this is an ongoing discussion,

>  "Maybe I'd only get a single response."

I'll be open to multiple awards due to the multiple approaches to the problem. My assumption was that the riddle was sufficiently common that those who are resourceful could make use of that skill as well (resourceful).

I think this question has value in two other areas of interest, so allocating more points here can be considered.

1) For both low-level hardware and in software, I've noticed a very large employment of negative logic. Use of a NAND gate. Inverters. Use of "If not this an not that or them then..."

2) For project involvement and personal time management.

The former is of course less a 'riddle', but no less interesting, and possibly applicable.

For the latter, consider a case where a project has to be completed within one time increment, and there remain two possible 'features' to add, but only one can be included. At the moment, all that is known is one of them will make project successful, the other will cause it to fail.

On a personal level, the destination could be a job interview for double salary. It could be to meet up with the person you've desired to spend the rest of your life with.

The criteria of the destination is based upon time = a certain clock position. You find yourself in a position where there's that forking, where you have to decide quickly which path to take, knowing one will succeed and the other will fail. Flip a coin? Toss the dice and let a god decide fate? Maybe a magic 8-ball? Numerology? Astrology?

Or be a fatalist, not caring, for if one misses the immediate opportunity, it could be not meant to be, and possibly a better opportunity, as yet unknown, may lie along the alternative path.

==============================================

I think the latest Sunbow approach to the problem is along the lines of #3 & #4 above, to not let the problem/question arise at all to present its implication (50/50 pass/fail). Taking some time out to perform some fore-planning could have value in such future experiences. Such that, when the problem would have occured, one can set back in chair with feet on desk saying "yup, ready for that one" instead of having to be running around in circles saying "Oh, gosh, what will I ever do?" and wasting even more time than one can afford. So name some ways for making plan for unknown!? An oldie(s) is gathering knowledge and experience, initially through an educational system or religious rituals or cultural tradition,, use of family values to develop habits and disciplines in preparation for facing riddles and puzzles. Later on, a SunBow can take out some time for surfing, head to experts-exchange, and pick up on some little clues that can better prepare one for facing dilemmas, feet up on desk, all problems resolved, projects ahead of schedule or done -- ready. Prior to EE, I'd thought chatting had little value for anyone who's gone through puberty.

But back to basics --- this question was supposed to be just the resurface for an old riddle. (but) Take it wherever you want it to go. Maybe get us a better copy of it from somewhere off the web?

OK people have u realized that there is no indictation of which side the lier and/or truth teller is standing(at least in this version of this riddle).

This means we can't ask them direct questions eg- the one i proposed before (#6)

also we may ask EITHER of them just one question, the grammer behind this would idicate that we  can only ask one qustion to ONE of the robed persons(sunbow pls corect me if i've miss read)

Cutting a long story short- this is imposible to answer unless we know who is the lier and/or truther (regardless of wheather we get 1 or 2 questions)

we should go with (what i interprete as) what sunbow said in his/her last comment. It is the only way to get there, by guessing (letting fate decide)

Finaly i have herd this riddle before or a very similar one,  and the answer was as above #6, but there we'd need to know who is the lier truther bla bla is.

IMPOSIBLE.

> (sunbow pls corect me if

You are right, I neglected some of that.

> also we may ask EITHER of them just one question

You are correct again, as I recall the problem. This invalidates your first comment two (?) ways.

> we  can only ask one qustion to ONE of the robed persons

yes, as I recollect. And neither has a sign. The base of problem is not knowing one from the other. Maybe you could tell them apart if you belonged to same religion or something, but you would not, for that would make it less of a problem.

> i have herd this riddle before or a very similar one,  and the answer was as above #6

You've lost me on the enumerology. Could you mean this?:

> if the truthers telling the truth that is

Now that would be a different TA I would think, or at least what I referred to as fourth approach to the problem, of invalidating the question itself. I was attempting to not embed any tricks that made that so. If you want to try rationalizing that further, go ahead, but it looks like so far you are outnumbered. So, good luck.

> this is imposible to answer unless we know who is the lier and/or truther

Not so according to some. Some people try to answer using twists such as provided by integer, meintsi, Joeisanerd et al.

What may remain to be seen, drn, is whether you can also find flaw in their logic. I don't know answer, having forgotten. Naysayers may not like employment of double-negatives to end up with a positive. I dunno. But thought it might be thought-provoking to some in attendance here.

The double negatives and contrapositive (if a then b implies if not b then not a) logic is all over riddles of this sort.  I can also attest to your systems comments, as a programmer I employ this sort of logic all the time.

An illustration of similar thinking is as follows:  A man is standing in front of a tribe of savages about to be punished.  He is permitted one sentance.  If he tells the truth he will be stoned to death, if he lies he will be burned to death.  He is asked to make his statement, does so, and walks away unharmed. What was the sentance? (I will leave the answer for others to figure out).

The A vs Non-A argument is often times substituted to impose a false dichotomy.  For example, the fact that I do not like squid ice cream does not mean that I *dislike* it. I have no opinion on the matter, therefore I do not like it and I do not dislike it.

Ciow,

Integer

This sentence is a lie.

dm,

This is not impossible.  The drive behind this riddle/puzzle is to challenge your ability to discern the answer with minimal information (as are MOST logic puzzles, in fact).

Obviously, knowing which one is the liar would make this easier - then it wouldn't be a puizzle.

Try step-by-step walking through the scenario that integer gave two different ways:

1) Assume LEFT is truthful and RIGHT is the liar.
2) Assume RIGHT is truthful and LEFT is the liar.

Based on the information given (and that we believe the sign) - those are the only two scenarios.  If both of the only scenarios point to the same destination, then it doesn't matter which is which -- the result is the same.

Peace,
*Drew

HEy Integer -  Easy... His comment has nothing to do with what he is being punished for, there for it is neither a lie or the truth.  He is there for set free.  We assume he will comment on what he is being punished for.

Well, perhaps the embedded riddle in an answer to a riddle was bad form :-)  I hate to derail SunBow's thread.  Perhaps it will help bring the conversation if I provide the answe.Here is the answer I had in mind.  Here goes:  "I will be burned".   If he says "I will be burned" and is indeed burned then he is telling the truth.  Well if he is telling the truth then he is stoned.  If he is stoned then he is not burned.  The statement contradicts itself and is inherantly invalid since something can not be both true and false since we must assume the law of identity holds here :-)  QED.

pick any person and ask him what the answer would be if he asked the other person and take the other road

Answer? Nominations, please. Which one to pick here? There seem so many to choose from here. And so close, but each missing just a little? I don't want to be too picky or finicky about it, but the signs are N/A, which is basis for need to ask. Maybe they both point down, so asking "which sign" is no good. If one goes directional left/right, well, who is now facing in which direction, and what is on their left? I am very appreciative of this receiving such a response.

Nominations?

> Here is the answer I had in mind.  Here goes:  "I will be burned".  

That's what I came up with.

I express gratitude also for those clarifying about the basic rules that make this a riddle.

You don't need to talk to the people.
Seeing as how there is only one post that the two signs were attached to, and the signs must point in different directions, therefor one of the signs would attach one side to the signpost and the other would attach it's opposite side.
So you just pickup the two signs, line up the parts where they were attached to the post, and you will get the correct path to take.
Also, seeing as the people are dressed in robes, they would not be able to run very fast, so I would grab their money jar and leg it towards the city.

;P

The way to avoid the above would be to have four signs.
The first to read "City" (or perhaps what the city is named) and another sign to have an arrow. Both signs attached through the dead center would mean that the arrow could be turned through 180. Then have the same layout for the pit, and if the signs were removed then it wouldn't be as easy to detect which arrow went with which label nor which direction it pointed in.

Oh and I would go left anyway. :)

Just sit and wait.  The city will build out to the fork in no time.

Variation on the old hippy joke "Let's just sit here and wait until the morning and they will open the gate." - ring any bells out there? @:-\

Hi,

Heres my version of the solution.
Since both the signs, that is the arrows that point in a direction are meant to be read from the same side of the road, they would be logically painted on one side only.

So pick up the signs and hold them with the painted side facing you.
It is only logical that the arrows will not point in the opposite directions. That is the arrow pointing to the right fork will be for the right sign and the one for left will be for the left sign.

So there u get your right way to the city...unless ofcourse the fork lies on beverly hills, where they would have wasted paint on both the side ;-)

Lets settle this fast.
Have fun

Would like to know what I missed........

THANK GOD FOR PORTABLE GPS !!!

I've got a different solution.

What I would do is ask either one of the persons this question, pointing to either one of the roads:
"If I were to ask you if the path I'm pointing to leads to the city, would you say yes?"

There are four possibilities here, each of which should give a clear answer:
1. The person asked is a truth teller, and the path pointed to leads to the city.
The person will answer "Yes" because he would answer "Yes" if he was asked if the path pointed to leads to the city.

2: The person asked is a truth teller, and the path pointed to leads to the pit.
The person will answer "No" because he would answer "No" if he was asked if the path pointed to leads to the city.

3: The person asked is a liar, and the path pointed to leads to the city.
The person will answer "Yes" because he would answer "No" if he was asked if the path pointed to leads to the city.

4: The person asked is a liar, and the path pointed to leads to the pit.
The person will answer "No" because he would answer "Yes" if he was asked if the path pointed to leads to the city.

In any case, the person will say "Yes" if the path pointed to leads to the city, and "No" if the path leads to the pit.

________________________________
By the way, I stumbled on this site while looking for some help with a problem I've been having with Windows 98. Something to do with the Windows 98 Setup hanging while "Updating System Settings..." after some driver installation and rebooting. I can't find any help anywhere...

Jocopshonw> Windows 98 Setup hanging while "Updating System Settings..."

Often you must beware of automagic or web-enabled upgrade. For TA I suggest ask in Hardware first, then in Win98, then...

> 4: The person asked is a liar, and the path pointed to leads to the pit.

Aha! That may be the clearest yet on the multiple negatives (becoming a positive?). [unaddressed, seems to be their mind-reading skills, ensuring that the asker gets to receive a perceived lie or not. Maybe that is a good thing]

> the person will say "Yes" if the path pointed to leads to the city, and "No" if the path leads

= ? , and that gives you .............. ?

Priestex> That is the arrow pointing to the right fork will be for the right sign and the one for left will be for the left sign.

? achieving this how? Maybe years went by and paint wore off. Are we assuming here that the brush-strokes of a_painter were had a known directionality?

> the arrows will not

+ After rechecking the question, the "given" does not include any arrows

buff_java> PORTABLE GPS !!!

"Batteries not Included!"

sagacity> to challenge your ability to discern the answer with minimal information

Yes.
So, what is question?
Or refute "answer" of others.

integer> statement contradicts itself and is inherantly invalid since something can not be both true and false since we must assume

Therein lies the fun and|or perplexity, which can either be viewed as a mental challenge or as an excuse to go partake of something with mind-numbing effects.

: - )   "I'll drink to that."

boughtonp> line up the parts where they were

How to do that!

> seeing as the people are dressed in robes

Do.
All remember, if not clear, that who they are is irrelevant. They can be angels, one still angellic, the other fallen, but you mere human cannot tell them apart. They can be speaking frogs. Who they are is not party to problem.

> so I would grab their money jar

<heh>                                      :-)

Nice one. I included that only for color or red-herring. Wondered if it was too much. The suggestion is just a tad short, namely, which direction is city? But then, someone who'd stoop so low as to swipe the jar is unlikely to be mental magnate anyways, so taking the dough rather fits such a person who forgot to ask directions first. For such doughboys I can also enjoy the clippings on stupid criminals, such as one who decides to get funds and writes note "Gimme money" on back of piece of mail addressed to him, or the one who wrote "I gotta GUN" on handiest note_paper which happened to be his own deposit slip - when they succeed in intention to convince bankteller to turn over to them a handful of ready cash.

meintsi> Would like to know what I missed........
 
Whenever I think thread dead and time for close-out, yours does look to be among closest acceptable. But I'd already indicated problem. Ambiguity introduced unnecessarily. Of the three ways to go, which is left, which is right, to whom? The "given" does not define, so if you introduce a concept, then burden is on you to define. Is it your left or truth-teller's left? Is it pertaining to who is facing whom, does one need address concept of mirror image for distinguishing? Did asker turn to face answerer? I am want to "assume" that we all know that left/right must be based upon the approach path of the traveller, but you know what they say about assumptions. Once one is falling into a bottomless pit or mire (of a project?) is not the bestest of times to reconsider whether one properly shored up on assumptions and preconceived notions. IMO.

halfcent50> Just sit and wait.  The city will build out to the fork in no time.

;-) Cute. Like dbrunton's "This sentence is a lie." Although riddle resulution remains distant, it rather fits other humanistic perceptions, like the money jar grab.

Asker could be in dire need of job, and on way to job interview, with requirement to be on time. The current lack of job may reflect prior condition of asker to prefer being stupified. Possibly alcoholic for example. Or preference of alternative lifestyle such as hippy. So an answer is arrived at: sit down and wait. Then there's a strike, or city changes direction of expansion, and anyway it is too late, someone else was chosen for job. It all still fits, for asker can find excuse to blame someone else for current lack of work, and revert to being stupified, hit the bottle again or what have you, which is a preferred condition anyway. Asker gets to achieve a desired result.

But for points, that was not question, and I (reader) should not be left with the filling in of blanks for such a story, for a response that traveller gets what is wanted/asked for can apply to others as well.

+++ I tried here to address all outstandings... to reduce need for subsequence commments to have to review each of the prior ones. If I missed any, sorry, apologies in advance.

boughtonp> Oh and I would go left anyway. :)

Hmm. I too. Whenever presented fork, my brain is never doing a 50|50 odds, it ever leans left (as if right can be assumed wrong?). It also "thinks" that this is most likely the clockwise direction. (But for a why or whether it could matter, that is an alternative pursuit).

I dunno if this would help, but maybe if a meintsi addressed the KISS answer of a spankenstien.

Wait.. I think I made a couple mistakes in my solution. Let me fix it.

--------------------------------------------------------
1. The person asked is a truth teller, and the path pointed to leads to the city.
The person will answer "Yes" because he would answer "Yes" if he was asked if the path pointed to leads to the city.

2: The person asked is a truth teller, and the path pointed to leads to the pit.
The person will answer "No" because he would answer "No" if he was asked if the path pointed to leads to the pit.

3: The person asked is a liar, and the path pointed to leads to the city.
The person will answer "Yes" because he would answer "No" if he was asked if the path pointed to leads to the city.

4: The person asked is a liar, and the path pointed to leads to the pit.
The person will answer "No" because he would answer "Yes" if he was asked if the path pointed to leads to the pit.

In any case, the person will say "Yes" if the path pointed to leads to the city, and "No" if the path leads to the pit.
--------------------------------------------------------

If he says yes, I would take the path I pointed to. If he says no, I would take the other one.

Thanks for the fun puzzle SunBow.  I stand by my original solution on 12/27/2002 12:09PM PST.

Jocopshown -
  Regarding number four....

"If I were to ask you if the path I'm pointing to leads to the city, would you say yes?"

If the person is a liar and the path pointed to leads to the pit, wouldn't the person answer "Yes" also because he has to lie about saying "No".(A lie about the lie)  Seems like your answer is is expecting a truthful response.

Integer...
  The signs are on the ground, how do you know which way they are pointing?
 
SunBow...
  Point about ambiguty introduced correct.

Revised solution...

Point to 1 of the paths, pick 1 person and ask him....

Would the other person tell me that the direction I am pointing to is the way to the city?

If the person you chose to ask is the truthful person and the direction I am pointing to is the ...
  Correct path, the person will answer no. (truthful person tells liar will lie)
  Incorrect path, the person will answer yes. (truthful person tells liar will lie)

If the person you chose to ask is the liar and the direction I am pointing to is the ...
  Correct path, the person will answer no. (liar lies about truthful person)
  Incorrect path, the person will answer yes. (liar lies about truthful person)

So, it doesn't matter whom you ask, if the answer is NO, take the path you are pointing to; and if the answer is YES, take the other path.

>> Would the other person tell me that the direction
>> I am pointing to is the way to the city?

The truthful person would answer no on both counts, the liar would answer yes on both counts.
Why? Because the other person is not going to tell you that the direction you are pointing to is the way of the city, due to only being allowed to ask one question. :P

>meintsi
>>Regarding number four....

"4: The person asked is a liar, and the path pointed to leads to the pit.
The person will answer "No" because he would answer "Yes" if he was asked if the path pointed to leads to the pit."

I'm sorry, I was confused in my last entry. Look at my first entry instead. My first entry says "... leads to the city." instead of "... leads to the pit." in numbers 2 and 4.

So in number 4, you are pointing to the path that leads to the pit, and asking the liar the question: "If I were to ask you if the path I'm pointing to leads to the city, would you say yes?"
His answer to "Does the path I'm pointing lead to the city?" would be "Yes," because it would be a lie. He would then lie about what his answer would be (because he knows he would lie and say "Yes") and therefore his final answer would be "No."

Hey, who needs to ask when you can just grab both jars and see whether they are following you. If they do, then u must be following the right path. if not, go to the opposite direction. Just don't run too fast though, or they might give up chasing you after a short while. Ain't fast runners, they are..
If the above solution is way too drastic, well... throw their jars each towards both direction. Observe who is going after their jars and who is not. follow the one who do so(chasing after the jar). unless you are a wimpy thrower, or the rob-wearing figures don't love their lives, u will arrive at the city safe n sound in no time.

never thrust any strangers. especially when a truther can't be distinguished from a liar.

>> never thrust any strangers

I'll be sure to take your advice into consideration, but do you have any suggestions on whether to TRUST strangers?

;)

This is an another one. Donate to any person. ask one of them, "if u appreciate what i just have done, tell me the direction to the city. If you don't, point me to the wrong direction. Don't lie to your heart." . The liar will lie to you, even about his feeling. and the truther always tell the truth. The truther or the liar bth will point in the correct path.Both appreciate you and will make their pointings based on that.

Comment on this, please... To SunBow, i think ur question is awakening my old rusty mind back to work, u know. well, that's what a holiday too long do to you...

sorry boughtonp. wrong spelling. u know.. that rusty mind.. hehe. kudos to u.

Heh, I thought it was quite an amusing typo, but maybe that's just my sick mind. ;)

twisting turning mine mind too, see also: thrust of 'stranger' Tamar, producing a proud heritage, legacy, and trust in gene_pool.

philosophy huh? let's use a little bit of 'justification' here. When any person has answered to our question (which one is the correct way), do we justify whether it's the truth or not? To find out the correct way, we need a proof that the given answer is the correct answer. so maybe after a sum of donation has been made, you can ask any of the person to show you the way to the city, with him leading in front of you.

I'd drop a buck in the jar and then I would look to either one of them and ask;

What would the other robed person say your path leads to?

This will reveal the lie and I will choose the inverse of this reply.

So, if I am told the City is on the Left, I go Right.

And if I am told the City is on the Right, I go Left.


This is because the truthful person will tell the truth and tell you the lie that the liar would have told you.  (ie: Truthful person reveals liars lie)

And the liar will tell you a lie that the truthful person would have told you.
(ie: The liar will lie about the truth which is a lie)


So the answer is the opposite of whatever either one answers.

ARGH! ARGH! ARGH!

Why why why do people insist on repeating everything? What possiblity point is there in repeating everything? People repeat things insistantly, but for what reason?

It's driving me insane!

I'm going mad!

Completely nuts.

uSE iNCESSANTLY IN bOUGHTONP'S pOST

bUT mIRRIAM-wEBSTER'S dOES sHOW iNSISTENTLY....so go with his original idea..........my bad......

yHeh.
uWeirdo.

tANK-yE

because one always lies and the other always tells the truth, you could simply ask "is a tree made of wood" or something easy and everyone should know.  The truther goes on to tell you "yes" while the liar will say "no", thereby revealing the liar.  Then simply ask the "truther" which way the city is.

Pedestrian, You violated the initial condition.  You can ask one only question.  The correct answer to this riddle was provided 12/27/2002 12:09PM PST.  

SunBow, How long are you going to let this thread drag out?

>What would the other robed person say your path leads to?

That definitely wouldn't work; the liar might not answer either "bottomless pit" or "city", but just some other random lie like "Pig Farm", "Marioland", "China", or whatever. Because of that the only thing the truther would tell you is he has no idea what the other guy would say, it could be anything but the truth.

The fact that there are two is a red herring. you only need one of either type. You ask him the following question: "If I were to ask you if the left path leads to the city, would you say 'yes'?" If the person asked is a truth teller, he will answer "yes" if the left path leads to freedom, and "no" otherwise. But so will the liar. So, either way, go left if the answer is "yes", and right otherwise

You ask one of the person (say. person A):
"If you ask the other person (person B) the direction to city, which direction would he point to ?"

The answer you get will be a lie for sure (because the answer passes through both persons; whatever order, there will be a lie in final answer).
So just go the other way !

How About;

You choose one of the two roads, take the post and use it to threaten one of the robed guys into walking ahead of you. If he falls into the bottomless pit, you obviously chose the wrong road. Optionally you can also steal their money, and take the bus.

I solved the puzzle without asking even 1 question!

"How About;" was a question.

>>"How About;" was a question

"I solved the puzzle without asking even 1 question!" was the answer to.

It was not the answer. It may have been a response, but an answer solves something, and your response solved nothing.
The only answer can be from SunBow, who either says yes or no to your query.

you win,
but hey, at least it was better than the classic answer I must have read in full detail about five times in this thread

Heh, that it was.

"There is a person dressed in a robe on either side of the post"

...Damn, that's a big person. Or a skinny post.

Query for the classic responders: who painted the sign?

Boughtonp - LOL.

take a rock and pelt the man on the left.  ask him if he was just hit by something.

If he says no, then he is the liar.  Pelt him again and ask the other guy.

If he says yes, he is the truthful man so apologize, give him some change, and ask which direction to take

actually i messed up

if he says yes, then ask the other guy, who is the liar, which road to take and go the opposite way.

(i am assuming that you can ask both men one question)

me 2

You need to look for which guy has the fresh paint on his hands - chances are he wasn't that tidy. Since they both live around there it's safe to assume that they both DO in fact know which sign goes where. Therefore, the truth teller would have the paint on him somewhere. Ask the one with paint on him which is the correct path.
My reasoning is this, if the liar had painted the sign, then he would have said that they don't know the correct way.

or, even better;

The sign says; 'Donations are optional, but appreciated'. This is obviously a lie, because the satisfacion of sending someone who didn't pay into the bottomless pit would be much to great to resist, so I wouldn't say donations are optional. So the sign was painted by a liar.
So everything on the sign is a lie. That means;
-Both men in robes are liars, so it doesn't matter who painted the sign.
- They don't know which sign was pointed in what direction.

Therefore I stick to my original solution. (the one involving beating up & stuff)

tell them your name. (this is not a question)
they therefore know your name
Ask one of them, "what is my name?"
Liar will lie, Truthteller will say your name.
Then knowing that, you know who's telling the truth and who's telling the lie.

Ask the other guy now.
If the other guy is the truthsayer, ask him which way is to the city.
If the other guy is the liar, ask him which way is it to the pit.

You can't get out of objective questions.

You can't ask them a "1+1 = 2" question because they might not know math.

Similarly you can ask "is that the sun in the sky?" in the morning, assuming we are in the same universe (although a bottomless pit is fantastical enough =) )

A pit can be bottomless if it is an inverted cone shape, as then it will only have walls, and no bottom...

Unfortunately, it's specified that "you can ask either of us one question" not "EACH of us" - that's one question, period.

I suppose you could say "Hi, my name's X. What's my name AND which way to the city?"

I still want to know who painted that sign.

Done? You've certainly not made the choice here very easy for me, while I still lean for splitting this somehow... for those interested, there's a sequel:

Title: 2 guards
http://www.experts-exchange.com/Miscellaneous/Puzzles_Riddles/Q_20508263.html
From: 1loser1; Date: 02/10/2003 02:57PM PST; Status: Waiting for Answer; Points: 50

... hmmmp let me see
<----<<   >>----->
Pit    or   Destination

i facing in one direction but i dont know which one.
so i choose >>----->

im a man, so i ask
im a woman going to the right direction. Right?

TRUTH IS im man           right direction ? if yes
NOTliar  answer: NO                
No, your not a woman
                          right direction ? if yes
liar     answer: NO
No, your a woman going to the right direction ??? right? his asnwer this, should be his answer
or should it be i dont know?

TRUTH IS im man           right direction ? if NOT
NOTliar  answer: NO        
No, your not going to the right direction
                          right direction ? if NOT
liar     answer: YES              
Yes, your a woman going to the right path

SO I THEREFORE CONCLUDE! if both answered yes and no then im not going to the right direction else if one cannot answer(hehe) or both no answer then im going to the right direction
 

erase ! again again again!

... hmmmp let me see
<----<<   >>----->
Pit    or   Destination

i facing in one direction but i dont know which one.
so i choose >>----->

im a man, so i ask
im a woman going to the right direction. Right?
***********************************
TRUTH IS im man           right direction ? if yes
NOTliar  answer: NO                
No, your not a woman
                          right direction ? if yes
liar     answer: NO
No, your a woman going to the right direction
Yes, your a woman going to the right direction
or Yes and No?? if its yes and no then its a NO answer
********************************

TRUTH IS im man           right direction ? if NOT
NOTliar  answer: NO        
No, your not going to the right direction
                          right direction ? if NOT
liar     answer: YES              
Yes, your a woman going to the right path
********************************
SO I THEREFORE CONCLUDE! IF i did get the answer
"No, your not going to the right direction" and
"Yes, your a woman going to the right path"
then the other way is the right answer!

"No, your a woman going to the right direction
Yes, your a woman going to the right direction
or Yes and No?? if its yes and no then its a NO answer"
i wonder how the liar will aswer to this question.

a simple plain NO, right?
or Yes to first part and no the second part.
OR Much Prefered answer by the liar.if he is very strict in lying then he should answer,
"technically, yes your a woman and no,your going to the wrong direction"

Satisfied?? **** APLAUSE!!!

WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE CORRECT ANSWER!!!

"WE'VE ALREADY GOT THE CORRECT ANSWER!!! "

Which one is the answer? where's the view accepted answer???

My answer is the correct one.  Its a logic problem not a semantics debate.  This is silly.

Wait wait wait - we don't have an accepted answer because:

"...solve it or for more points provide refutations to resolution(s)."

and there are lots of refutations here.

AND as a logic problem, it HAS to be a semantics debate. If the answer is logical to the one answering the question BUT his/her expression is semantically flawed, it cannot be correct.

The problem with logic problems, like simple physics problems, is that there are all sorts of complicating factors that get ignored. And in this case, they're especially important - I say again, "who painted the sign?" Do you believe everything you read?

Personally, I still like all of Mennovdh's answers.  :-)

The most secure way to do it, without the assumption that the guards themselves know that one always tells the truth and the other lies, ie knowledge about one another, is to ask either one:

If I were to ask you if the left path is the path to freedom, what would be your answer?

--------------------------
If it is the path to freedom:

The true one would answer yes if you asked him, and so would answer yes to your hypothetical question

The false one would answer no if you asked him, and so would answer yes to your hypothetical question

If it is NOT the path to freedom:

The true one would answer no if you asked him, and so would answer no to your hypothetical question

The false one would answer yes if you asked him, and so would answer no to your hypothetical question
--------------------------

My father told me this riddle when I was 7 and I didn't understand how it worked.  Now I do.  Ha!  I'm a tiny bit smarter now.

Thegnu, I like your answer better than mine.  Right on!

Of course some people might consider your question to be the question, not a query about the theoretical question, so it depends on how good the Guard's knowledge of English is.

Infact how do we even know the Guards speak English?
Or do they even speak at all!?
Maybe you need to write in the dirt or something?
Maybe you need to use sign language?


ARGGGH!!!!! Someone close this question before I go and kill some innocent blades of grass!!!!

Of course (assuming I didn't miss someone else pointing this out) it could always be that it's a case of the cow and the bird...
Just because the take the road that leads to your destination does not mean the road is not fraught with other perils (such as the roving band of brigands who will rob, eviscerate, and tear you asunder with their mountain-bred beasts), and that there hasn't been a bridge built across the section of road that would have plummetted you to your incredibly boring death through starvation, dehydration, or incineration as you pass through the core of the Earth due to falling into a pit with no bottom...

=]

Answer:-

The traveller asked "which road would go to your village". He would take the road the villager pointed to because a truthful person would point towards a truthful village, and the liar would also point to the truthful village since he is a liar, and therefore  could not point to his own village.

There is only one village, the other route is a bottomless pit.
Neither of the men are known to be from that village.

The answer is quite simple if you just THINK!!!!
Asuming it's light (day time) you could simply ask either just this...

Is it day time?
or if you unlike that...
Am I wearing shoe laces?
Do I have a watch on?

Basicly any fact....

You can ask either man/gaurd/robed dude and ignore one complely

Unlike most "Mind Benders" you are required to think logically.

YOU CAN ONLY ASK A *SINGLE* QUESTION. Just one. No more than that.
Your goal is to reach the city, not discover who speaks the truth and who lies.

Take the first 3 lefts......Then you'll always be going the "Right" way....................

Can you possibly just simply ask 2 questions but merge them into one...

so sneakely enough so's as the gaurd's do not relise, eg: (not very sneaky)

In which direction is the city closest to us in which the sun is still shining?

Prosuming the city of destination is actuarly closest to us (us being where "you" are in the riddle)

>Zoule...
 So you ask your question and they point to the path to your left.
 You begin to walk down that path and an hour or so later you start to fall into a bottomless pit...
 Then for the briefest moment you get a bird's eye view of the countryside... you see that the path that had led to the right wraps around to the left so that if the bottomless pit hadn't been here this direction would have been the shortest and most direct as the bird flies... and then you continue your endless fall... *e.s.*  


I always was a nasty D.M.  =]

One More.  Ask one of them... If I were to ask the other guard which path I should take to avoid the pit, what would he say?  Then do the opposite.

;-)

Sorry, I'd held this open awhile in part because there were a few spin-off, similar ones, near identical, I was seeking balance in the award, maybe 50 pts each to four experts or something.  Thought I'd closed it, for I had looked for it before. It is a bit long, but it should be clear that among the better (different) answers, the first comment is definitely incorrect as stated by more than one expert above. There are a variety of approaches to the problem. As it looks like only 20 pts at stake here, the award above is not critical issue, just noting for anyone further repeating of the same question yet again. I can say Integer can deserve the 20 for the continued participation in a traditionally difficult logic problem, as attested by the other (6?) spin-off questions by others.

Nata, I just got the last two notifs, sorry I missed (until now) the 2/16 one (buried in 2100 notifs + 2600 others yet in inbox)

For others,  do know I fully appreciate all the contributions. While I won't now take time out to figure out how I would have split it, I if you are game for other questions that encourage thinking, try any of my other open ones, I've been trying to close them all (and participate less in newer ones. It is easier these days for me to be more attentive in Philosophy TA, new Q's, than old buried ones). I see many familiar names, so most of us have probably continued on, and maybe I've been able to reward in other ways.  Feel free to comment below, I'll try to be more watchful for a few days.