Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

use Perl

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

Riddle More | Login | Reply

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Without JavaScript enabled, you might want to use the classic discussion system instead. If you login, you can remember this preference.

Definitions are in order (Score:1)

by Limbic Region (3985) on 2005.01.19 11:33 (#37639) Homepage Journal

Ok - I have thought about the possibility that two brothers are adopted and originally had the same parents but are now not legally related as brothers. This doesn't make them not biological brothers.

I have also thought of the weird implimcations of surrogates, sex changes, and what not - but it seems that would be too complicated for the riddle.

So I am left with guessing that the riddle is worded the way it is because we are assuming things that are not true.

So...
Does the fact that the sons have the same mother and father mean they have the same parents?

In other words - would the following restatement of the riddle still have the same answer?

There is more than one male with the same biological parents but the males are not legal or biological brothers

Reply to This
- Re:Definitions are in order (Score:1)
  
  by cog (4665)
  
  I guess...
- Re:Definitions are in order (Score:1)
  
  by Mr. Muskrat (4572)
  
  My guess is that "sons", "father", and "mother" have nothing to do with genetic connections.

Get More Comments

Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.