Problem: The Unexpected Hanging Paradox A judge tells a condemned prisoner: > “You will be hanged at noon on one weekday in the next week (Monday to Friday), but the execution will be a surprise to you. You will not know the day of the hanging until the executioner comes for you that day.” The prisoner thinks: "It can't be Friday, because if I'm not hanged by Thursday, it must be Friday, so it won't be a surprise." "Then it can't be Thursday either, because if it's not by Wednesday, and it can't be Friday, it must be Thursday..." The prisoner reasons like this and concludes he cannot be hanged at all. But on Wednesday, the executioner comes, and the prisoner is surprised!

视频信息

答案文本 复制

视频字幕 复制

Welcome to the Unexpected Hanging Paradox, one of the most famous logical puzzles in philosophy and mathematics. A judge tells a condemned prisoner that he will be hanged on one weekday in the next week, but the execution will be a surprise. The prisoner must not know the day until the executioner arrives. This seemingly simple statement creates a fascinating logical dilemma that challenges our understanding of prediction and surprise. The prisoner begins his logical analysis using backward induction. He starts with Friday, the last possible day. He reasons that if he hasn't been hanged by the end of Thursday, then Friday becomes the only remaining option, making it predictable and therefore not a surprise. So Friday is eliminated. With Friday ruled out, he applies the same logic to Thursday. If he survives Wednesday and Friday is impossible, then Thursday becomes certain and thus not surprising. This reasoning continues backward through each day, eliminating Wednesday, Tuesday, and finally Monday. The prisoner concludes that no day can satisfy the judge's conditions. But then Wednesday morning arrives, and the paradox reveals itself. The executioner comes for the prisoner, who is completely surprised! His logical reasoning had convinced him that no hanging could occur while satisfying the judge's conditions. Yet here it is happening, and he is indeed surprised, exactly as the judge promised. This creates the heart of the paradox: the prisoner's logical deduction that predicted no surprise hanging was possible is contradicted by the actual event, which occurs and is genuinely surprising. The resolution lies in understanding the flaw in the prisoner's reasoning. His logical deduction assumes that successfully predicting a day makes it impossible for that day to be surprising. However, the judge's statement creates a self-referential situation where perfect prediction becomes impossible. The prisoner's reasoning that Wednesday cannot be surprising because it would be predictable is contradicted by the fact that his very analysis led him to believe no hanging could occur at all. The key insight is that the surprise condition cannot be perfectly analyzed in advance. The hanging can happen on any day and still be genuinely surprising at the moment it occurs, regardless of prior logical analysis. The Unexpected Hanging Paradox reveals fundamental limitations in logical prediction when dealing with self-referential conditions. The prisoner's backward reasoning appears sound but fails because it creates a self-defeating scenario. The paradox shows us that some statements about future events cannot be perfectly analyzed in advance, especially when the analysis itself affects the outcome. This puzzle continues to fascinate philosophers and logicians as it highlights the complex relationship between prediction, knowledge, and surprise in logical systems.