Originally Posted by
DSchles
I will say one thing: Everyone (or most of us) seems to be concluding that: "1 rabbit saw 9 elephants while going to the river" somehow automatically means that "1 rabbit crossed paths with 9 elephants while going to the river." However, upon further reflection, I see nothing in the language that would force, logically, that conclusion. Why couldn't the rabbit be going to the river with the elephants, whom the rabbit saw as he quickly ran by them, not to see them again, as they were moving more slowly and were now behind the rabbit, but still on their way to the river? Is that not perfectly logical and possible? Just as possible as the rabbit crossed paths with the elephants? I'm afraid so. And yes, it is also possible that the elephants weren't moving at all and were just standing there!
But I'm sticking with 10, as we have no definitive language that says that the elephants were conclusively going to the river, while the language is unambiguous for the rabbit, monkeys, and the tortoises.
Don
Bookmarks