[woubit] Quid sum miser tunc dicturus... Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Lateral Puzzles » Solved Lateral Thinking Puzzles » Solved Puzzles - August 2005 » [woubit] Quid sum miser tunc dicturus? « Previous Next »

Author Message
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Tuesday, August 16, 2005 - 8:52 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

We have an excuse
Rose (Tackybritish)
Posted on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 1:55 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Well I think you should what you did was awful.:)
When you say we do you mean two or three people?
Are they people?insects?dolphins?plants?
Would help to figure out thier relationship? gender?age? Did they intentionally do it? Would it appear outwardly to be an awful thing to do but the excuse would clear all guilt? Are they of sound mind? Was there a murder? Are these people alive? Are they at a hearing pleading to the judge for leniency? Are they deaf? Is the title useful or completely random? Basically would it help to know the translation?
Lisa (Dlcygnet)
Posted on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 2:43 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

An excuse... for playing a sour note? For sounding lousy? For missing the minor/major key change? Darn those F sharps!

"What shall I, frail man, be pleading?" -> Is the phrase relevant? The musical piece relevant?
Lynne (Lynne)
Posted on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 7:23 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

I don't. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Awfully sorry. Must try harder next time.
Lynne (Lynne)
Posted on Friday, August 19, 2005 - 1:33 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Um - an excuse for not answering our questions? (not like you at all!) :)
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 3:57 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Rose (Tackybritish) on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 01:55 am:

Well I think you should what you did was awful. indeed, but this does not narrow things down very much
When you say we do you mean two or three people? and more. Quite a few more, in fact.
Are they people? this one insects?dolphins?plants?
Would help to figure out thier relationship? with whom? gender? yes age? no Did they intentionally do it? no, and there is a false assumption here Would it appear outwardly to be an awful thing to do but the excuse would clear all guilt? yesish, but this will not help very much Are they of sound mind? some of them are Was there a murder? no Are these people alive? yes Are they at a hearing pleading to the judge for leniency? no Are they deaf? none of them is Is the title useful or completely random? yope Basically would it help to know the translation? the translation is provided by our resident classical scholar below ...

By Lisa (Dlcygnet) on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 02:43 am:

An excuse... for playing a sour note? no For sounding lousy? no For missing the minor/major key change? no, but this is actually not all that far from the right forest Darn those F sharps! not to mention those G flats

"What shall I, frail man, be pleading?" quite so - thank you :) -> Is the phrase relevant? yes The musical piece relevant? no

By Lynne (Lynne) on Wednesday, August 17, 2005 - 07:23 am:

I don't. Mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Awfully sorry. Must try harder next time. si tacuisses, philosophus mansisses :)

By Lynne (Lynne) on Friday, August 19, 2005 - 01:33 pm:

Um - an excuse for not answering our questions? (not like you at all!) Ingemisco tanquam reus, culpa rubet vultus meus... I have been away for a few days
Ozymandias (Ozymandias)
Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 4:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

"We" - all of them males? Females? (Yes, I know the question might sound stupid, nevertheless...) An excuse for _not_ doing something? For looking forward to do something they haven't done yet? "We" meaning the group includes you, woubit? If so, as member of the LPF? As member of some other group, different from just "the group of the male human beings"? Is the excuse going to be valid forever? Only up to a certain moment? Is it needed to have an excuse at regular intervals? Only once in a lifetime? More than once but not at regular intervals?
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 5:40 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Ozymandias (Ozymandias) on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 04:42 pm:

"We" - all of them males? this one Females? (Yes, I know the question might sound stupid, nevertheless...not at all - very good question :) ) An excuse for _not_ doing something? yes For looking forward to do something they haven't done yet? no "We" meaning the group includes you, woubit? it does If so, as member of the LPF? no As member of some other group, different from just "the group of the male human beings"? no Is the excuse going to be valid forever? for ssv of "forever", yes Only up to a certain moment? Is it needed to have an excuse at regular intervals? no Only once in a lifetime? no More than once but not at regular intervals? yes
Ozymandias (Ozymandias)
Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 6:39 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Is the excuse due to the fact itself that "we are men"? To something related to the social aspects of it? the biological ones? The linguistic ones (something related to the construction of male substantives or other part of grammar in various languages)? Is it something no man at all does? Is it something only some men do? Is it something all women do? None at all? Is it something children, regardless of genders, do? Is it childrens don't do, regardless of gender? Does the neuter gender enter this puzzle, somehow?
"More than once": a specific number of times? Is there some relation between this thing and a person's age?
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 6:58 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Ozymandias (Ozymandias) on Sunday, August 21, 2005 - 06:39 pm:

Is the excuse due to the fact itself that "we are men"? yes To something related to the social aspects of it? yesish the biological ones? yesish The linguistic ones yes (something related to the construction of male substantives or other part of grammar in various languages but not like this)? Is it something no man at all does? so it is believed, yes Is it something only some men do? this is not generally believed Is it something all women do? yes None at all? no Is it something children, regardless of genders, do? male children and female children are different in this regard Is it childrens don't do, regardless of gender? no Does the neuter gender enter this puzzle, somehow? no
"More than once": a specific number of times? no Is there some relation between this thing and a person's age? strictly yes, but this is irrelevant
Lisa (Dlcygnet)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 2:01 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Does this refer to some generalization about 'all men'?
Does this refer to a study that gives men an excuse for something they typically do? Or don't do?
Like...
...not asking for directions?
...not talking about their feelings?
...not going to the bathroom in groups?
...not being able to multi-task?

E.g. "Men can only do one thing at a time or think about one thing at a time." (Sex?) And here's a study that shows why: Their hypocampus is capable of far fewer processes crossing over between the hemispheres... or rather, there has been shown to be fewer reactions going on there. The fewer the processes, the less their brain halves talk to each other, the less stuff you can do at once. Hence men have an excuse now as to why they don't want you to talk while they're having sex with you. *badum chink*
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 2:16 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Lisa (Dlcygnet) on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 02:01 am:

Does this refer to some generalization about 'all men'? yes
Does this refer to a study that gives men an excuse for something they typically do? Or don't do? this one
Like...
...not asking for directions?
...not talking about their feelings?
...not going to the bathroom in groups?
...not being able to multi-task? but none of these

E.g. "Men can only do one thing at a time or think about one thing at a time." (Sex?) And here's a study that shows why: Their hypocampus is capable of far fewer processes crossing over between the hemispheres... or rather, there has been shown to be fewer reactions going on there. The fewer the processes, the less their brain halves talk to each other, the less stuff you can do at once. Hence men have an excuse now as to why they don't want you to talk while they're having sex with you. *badum chink* nor yet this, though I suppose it might have come in useful once upon a time...
Lisa (Dlcygnet)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 3:14 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Does the generalization refer to something men generally don't do...
physically?
emotionally?
mentally?

Involving...
Animals?
Children?
Communication?
Driving?
Fantasies?
Farting?
Hunting?
Gathering?
Information?
Numbers?
Puberty?
Sex?
Singing?
Squeaking?
Stories?
Women?
Voice Changes?
Tony (E20)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 7:38 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Does the generalistaion involve listening?
... to speech?
... to music?
Ozymandias (Ozymandias)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 7:38 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Something that men don't do verbally? By gestures?

The linguistic aspects - are we talking about a specific language? More than one, but not all? All of them? Are we talking about nonverbal languages? Are we talking about written language(s)?
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 9:33 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Lisa (Dlcygnet) on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 03:14 am:

Does the generalization refer to something men generally don't do...
physically? this one
emotionally?
mentally? and this one

Involving...
Animals?
Children?
Communication? this one
Driving?
Fantasies?
Farting?
Hunting?
Gathering?
Information? and this one
Numbers?
Puberty?
Sex?
Singing?
Squeaking?
Stories?
Women? and this one
Voice Changes?

By Tony (E20) on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 07:38 am:

Does the generalistaion involve listening? indeed :)
... to speech? yes
... to music? yes

By Ozymandias (Ozymandias) on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 07:38 am:

Something that men don't do verbally? no By gestures? no

The linguistic aspects - are we talking about a specific language? no More than one, but not all? no All of them? yes - there may in fact be a very small number of exceptions, but I know of no specific cases Are we talking about nonverbal languages? no Are we talking about written language(s)? no
Tony (E20)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 11:10 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Is it not listening in general?
Or not listening to something(s) in particular?

Is the source of the excuse:
scientific research?
sociological research?
common knowledge?
newspaper or magazine article?
legal pronouncement?
survey of opinion?
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 12:18 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Tony (E20) on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 11:10 am:


Is it not listening in general?
Or not listening to something(s) in particular? this one

Is the source of the excuse:
scientific research? this one
sociological research?
common knowledge?
newspaper or magazine article?
legal pronouncement?
survey of opinion?
Lisa (Dlcygnet)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 2:20 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Men now have an excuse for not listening to women? Why am I suddenly very skeptical of this study...
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 2:49 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Lisa (Dlcygnet) on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 02:20 pm:


Men now have an excuse for not listening to women? exactly so Why am I suddenly very skeptical of this study... left as an exercise for the reader
Lisa (Dlcygnet)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 7:49 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Ok... so now we have to find the reason men have this excuse?
Did the study demonstrate that...
Men respond to different vocal pitches (lower voices) than women? Heck, everybody responds more to deeper voices.
Men have a different frequency range that their ears/brains can pick up? (generally larger wavelengths)
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 11:47 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Lisa (Dlcygnet) on Monday, August 22, 2005 - 07:49 pm:


Ok... so now we have to find the reason men have this excuse? indeed
Did the study demonstrate that...
Men respond to different vocal pitches (lower voices) than women? noish Heck, everybody responds more to deeper voices. except bats, perhaps
Men have a different frequency range that their ears/brains can pick up? no (generally larger wavelengths)
Arjun (Jun)
Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 12:05 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Is it the same reason why women can't read maps? :)
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 12:12 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Arjun (Jun) on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 12:05 am:

Is it the same reason why women can't read maps? no, and I suspect one or two howls of protest may be on the way. But that's all right. We don't have to listen :)
Lisa (Dlcygnet)
Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 1:11 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hrm... *re-examines minor/major key comment*

Men don't listen to women because...
Women's voices sound like music? So they just tune us out like the stuff they play in an elevator?
Women's voices activate the same part of the brain that music does? Left vs. Right brain activation? A complicated brain activity rather than a simple brain activity gets triggered?
And men can't handle more than a single simple activity at a time? *takes her last pot shot* e.g. Bothering to read a map rather than asking for and memorizing directions?
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 3:37 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

By Lisa (Dlcygnet) on Tuesday, August 23, 2005 - 01:11 am:


Hrm... *re-examines minor/major key comment* good idea :)

Men don't listen to women because...
Women's voices sound like music? exactly so So they just tune us out like the stuff they play in an elevator? well, not quite...
Women's voices activate the same part of the brain that music does? absolutely Left vs. Right brain activation? yes A complicated brain activity rather than a simple brain activity gets triggered? indeed
And men can't handle more than a single simple activity at a time? and often, not that many *takes her last pot shot* e.g. Bothering to read a map rather than asking for and memorizing directions? but we can do that. What we can't do is communicate the information in meaningful fashion to the driver, especially if she...

But enough. I fancy I heard on the air a weary and wandering sigh that sounded like

***** SPOILER *****

The truth is out there:

Men do have trouble hearing women, scientists find

London, Aug 09: Men who are accused of never listening by women now have an excuse - women's voices are more difficult for men to listen to than other men's, a report said.

The Daily Mail, quoting findings published in the specialist magazine NeuroImage, said researchers at Sheffield University in northern England discovered startling differences in the way the brain responds to male and female sounds.

Men deciphered female voices using the auditory part of the brain that processes music, while male voices engaged a simpler mechanism, it said.

The Mail quoted researcher Michael Hunter as saying "The female voice is actually more complex than the male voice, due to differences in the size and shape of the vocal cords and larynx between men and women, and also due to women having greater natural 'melody' in their voices.

"This causes a more complex range of sound frequencies than in a male voice."

The findings may help explain why people suffering hallucinations usually hear male voices, the report added, as the brain may find it much harder to conjure up a false female voice accurately than a false male voice.


Well done Lisa, well done the researchers at Sheffield, well done everyone. Even the men.

Add Your Message Here
Post:
Username: Posting Information:
This is a private posting area. Only registered users and moderators may post messages here.
Password:
Options: Enable HTML code in message
Automatically activate URLs in message
Action: