Well?

well?

Other urls found in this thread:

discordapp.com/invite/sP83A?utm_source=Discord Widget&utm_medium=Connect&username=guest
strawpoll.me/10995127
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

u nigga

>Niggers, final answer.

the viewer

The only thing they all share is a black outline, except for one.

The red one

the circle
the rest are simalar squares fagget

Red large outlined square

The second. It's the only 100% casual one

trips of truth

Red square, no black border, OP is a faggot.

This

This triggers me more than I am proud to admit. My autism levels are rising by the second.

Who cares

The white rectangle in the background

Every single one of those share similarities and differences from one another

But they also all share the same color except for the green one

u win

Reds square with black border - it's the only one that fits in every grouping that includes at least two shapes.

The circle

op here this is the correct answer you all are dumbass faggots

You're getting there

The square without a black outline

winner winner chicken dinner

The second shape shares a trait from every other shape, it has no unique quality. It is therefore the odd one out

The circle

They're all squares except one.
They're all red except one.
They're all outlined except one.
They're all the same width and height except one.

So you have to pick your reference before you can determine which one is the intruder.

You're welcome.

The one with no outline

>The only thing they all share is a black outline, except for one.
>the only thing they share is
>color
>shape
>size
except for one

they are all an odd one out it is a trick question so technically the second from the left is the odd one out because it has one of every quality that the others have but what makes them unique.

red large outlined square

no black outline square.
He thinks he's one of the cool kids in the middle. the circle and tiny square know their place.

And yet one of them has a special trait that none of the others do

second square
because
>first square: too small
>second square: nothing
>third square: too green
>fourth square: too much no border
>fifth: too much circle

>diameter
>color
>outline
>shape

Every item shares 3 out of 4 with 3 other shapes.
Every item is different in one category.

This is a pyscological test and your answers are troll food.
There is no"correct" answer.

red square

all others have something unique about them

from left to right:
1: smaller than others
2: nothing unique
3: green, others red
4: no outline, others outlined
5: circle, others square

the only special attribute is having sth in common with everything

The second from the left, because it's the only one without a unique quality.
>first one is only small shape
>third one is only green shape
>fourth one is only shape without outline
>fifth one is only circle

Yes there is a right answer you pretentious fuckwit

discordapp.com/invite/sP83A?utm_source=Discord Widget&utm_medium=Connect&username=guest

strawpoll.me/10995127
strawpoll.me/10995127
strawpoll.me/10995127

Yeah, I read the answer.
I would have never looked at it from that angle.

Well played OP.

This.

The fact that its the only one that share all the traits makes it unique....

The one without a black border

The first is the odd one out in that it is the only that is small.
The third is the odd one out because only it is green.
The fourth is the odd one out because it has no outline.
The fifth is the odd one out because it is round.
And the second is the odd one out because it is the only one that shares a property of all the others.

So from one standpoint, the second is the odd one out. From another, there is no odd one out, since they are all in some ways odd ones out.

Except for the second square which makes it the odd one out?

I came to this conclusion as well. All the others could be called the odd one out, not #2.

It seems the next logical step once you realize more than one can be called the odd one out... except one.

The large red square. It's the only one that shares something with all the others.

Going meta complicates this. If "not sharing a property" is itself a property, then the second square itself has a unique property, just like all the others. Meaning it is "just as unique" as others.

Maybe the best way to get behind this is to say that the second square is the only object whose unique property is logical rather than visual.

All the other shapes have only one difference between #2.

The way in which it's unique is fundamentally different. I'm guessing is you but to borrow that post, the first 4 all state something unique about it that none of the others have, but #2 is unique in having nothing unique, which is just the opposite. This separates #2 from the others.

This is a decent way to deal with the meta-problem. But what about ordering? It isn't the case that all are equidistant from #2, so it also isn't true that there's only one shape with one difference from #2. (i.e. #5 is three away from #2, and etc.)

I feel they should be regarded as their own entities and not given relative positions to each other, but if we consider that angle then the middle one is the odd one out, because it's not 3 away from anything.

OP here. The placement of the pictures in the image is irrelevant.

Which just reinforces the idea that there's no reason to call #2 the odd one out... Making it the odd one out.

Second from left. It's a baseline with no unique marker.

Yes, both are me. But I don't think the unique property of #2 is just "opposite": we can do better than that. "#2 has a meta-property, none of the others do" is one good fix. I also think, more specifically, #2s "uniqueness property" is a logical more abstract property, but that the other "uniqueness properties" are more simple visual similarities.

Nah you're just forcibly calling it's lack of uniqueness unique, which really is the same logic that leads to it being called the odd one out - lack of a reason to call it the odd one out.

The 2nd one its the only one not somehow unique

>far right is only circle
>red square is only one without a border
>green square is only green
>far one is only small shape
You cannot match my autism

There are two ways to look at this

first, the simple way:

-First is the odd one out cause of size
-Third is the odd one out cause of color
-Fourth is the odd one out cause of outline
-Fifth is the odd one out cause of shape

second, the way I think the OP invented:

-Second is the true odd one out cause of the lack of traits that would distinguish it from the others

-However this is sort of a paradox since ,how is it an odd one out by not being an odd one out if by our conclusion it's the odd one out by it's lack of difference from the others

etc etc

It being the only one lacking uniqueness makes it unique--by definition. There's nothing forcible about it. I'm simply showing that the question embeds assumptions into it about what answer "counts" as right, as well as what kind of properties we're supposed to group together. Like why is "meta"-ness more unique than "greenness"? I don't think it is, logically. The real fun with these questions is in revealing the hidden assumptions, not giving the answer "#2" which any brainless moron could figure out.

The other four you didn't pick.

No. The second one from the left is not unique in diameter, color, outline, or shape. So it is the odd one out.

It is forcible, just like the way you're trying to force more out of the problem than there is to be had. Ie. interpreting the image to indicate their relative positions to each other.

Nah, you're just low IQ and uncreative. Self-reference is pretty basic, standard-fare logic, incompleteness theorems and etc. You just feel insecure for not having thought to go meta.

OP here.

What the hell are you on about? Something is "forcible" just because the answer requires some out-of-the-box thought?

discordapp.com/invite/sP83A?utm_source=Discord Widget&utm_medium=Connect&username=guest

The green one. Because green is not a creative color.

And by your meta it's still #2 so what's the deal?

I think you misinterpreted something. Read Basically he's saying that in arriving to #2 being the odd one out, you've nullified it as a possible answer because it, like the others, has a reason to be called the odd one out.

The text at the top is the odd one out.

>outline
>shape
>size
>color
are you blind?

Could be the middle one because it's green, the one to the right because it has no black border, or the one on the far right because it's a circle. This question has multiple answers.

false dichotomy
they are each "the odd one out" in their own way
from left to right
>smaller than others
>only one to not be odd, which makes it odd
>green
>no outline
>round

Odd one out is the circle, because its lines aren't clean.

You might be a different dude than the butthurt "forcible" dude. If so, I've already agreed there's a way to justify the correct answer #2, but that your reasoning needs to be better than the self-defeating "It is unique in sharing all properties", because this is false in the meta-context, or if one considers ordering, or anything else hidden away, like how long it would take to spell it's properties, or how much energy your screen would take to display each or whatever other creative answer you decide. The trick is in specifying an answer that avoids all these problems, or that is at least more true than the self-defeating answer.

"#2 is the only object that is meta-unique" is one better description, and "#2 is the only object whose uniqueness-property is more logical than visual# is another.

The second one, it's the only one that shares features with all the other shapes.

Wasn't "It is unique in sharing all properties" yours?

It is a poorly worded question with the answer used as profile data of the examined. It also could lead to ethic violations of the test author.

No, I've been guy arguing "it is unique in that it's uniqueness property requires a meta-perspective" or the logical visual thing. The beauty of anonymous posting.

3 is green, but 4 hasn't got a border. 1 is a different scale, and 5 is the only circle.

except the fact that it's any of the choices other than the second one

since it's only 'odd' attribute is its lack of 'odd'ness so it basically nullifies itself

Now *this* is meta.

Okay, well which is the odd one out? You can only choose one.

The second square from the left: it alone has 1-change relation to all other objects, where the other objects all require at least two changes to mimic any other object but the large red square with the black outline.

This is good, also avoids the meta-problem.

you two retards, read

>the meta-problem.
what is this?

very done user you seem to have the autism levels most of us lacked to solve it

OP here. That's how I rationalized it the whole time.

You guys totally lost me when the word meta first showed up in this thread.

...

spot on, buddio

what's the meta-problem?

(this is as much as I understand of what the fuck they were saying)

basically everyone was saying that the second one was different by its lack of difference from the others which itself was a logical paradox

one of the anons realized that you could call the second one meta so it was the original and the others were altered versions of it so u could avoid that 'paradox'

Describes most of my girlfriends.

If you claim #2 is unique because it "doesn't share a property", you hit a "meta" problem because "not sharing a property" can itself be seen as a property. This is like the self-reference problems that come up in mathematical logic and etc.

But if you go with a solution like in , you avoid the "meta" problem, because instead of comparing all objects to some general principle, you only compare them to each other.

Only correct answer