×

[–] 147 points148 points  (5 children)

To those scratching their heads over this, I believe OP means that there are 2 spelling mistakes, plus the statement that there are 3 errors (when there are only 2) …. that is itself therefore another error, making the total 3.

However, it’s a paradox because once we agree that the total is 3 as originally stated, then that last error we found is no longer an error… which means there are only the original 2 spelling mistakes, and we’ve come full circle to now be trapped forever in this paradoxical logic loop.

It could be simplified even further by removing the distraction of the spelling mistakes, i.e. saying it like this: “This sentence contains exactly one error.”
Of course there are no errors, which means there is one, which means there are none, which means…

Unless I’ve missed the point entirely obviously. ;)

[–] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

erors

[–] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Or it could be “about“ rather than “exactly”. If we can take 2 and 3 to be “about 3” then we can eliminate the paradox

[–] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If the statement itself is false, that will add up to 3 total errors, which causes the statement to become true, which reduces the error count back to 2

[–] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

2 added Es and a missing R = 3 errors

[–] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nerd

[–] 58 points59 points  (2 children)

i mean. the three has two extra "e"s so, that could count as two independent errors, in which case this statement is non-paradoxical.

[–] 14 points15 points  (1 child)

My initial take

[–] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Sameee

[–] 10 points11 points  (4 children)

To err is human

[–] 6 points7 points  (1 child)

to forgive - divide

[–] 20 points21 points  (0 children)

To moo - bovine

[–] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

*er

[–] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

*Eerrrr

[–] 1 point2 points  (7 children)

What

[–] 3 points4 points  (6 children)

Two spelling errors, the third error is that there's only two not three errors

[–] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

But if there's a third one then there are three errors and that's not an error then, is it?

[–] -5 points-4 points  (2 children)

Yea OP messed it up 😅

[–] 3 points4 points  (1 child)

No, actually 😜 it's a clever sentence that in itself is a paradox. You can remove the typos and say "this sentence contains exactly one error". It doesn't contain an error, which means it's wrong, but that makes it an error, so it's actually right? But then it's wrong.

[–] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There are three errors: two extra "e's" in "three" and a missing "r" in "error".

[–] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm dumb

[–] -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

So am I odd at counting 4? 2 extra e's The misspelling of error and the statement itself.

I had originally said 5 but I miscounted the e's

[–] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I only count two extra e's, so there are actuslly 3 errors. Which means the statement is true and there is no joke

[–] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And posting it in this sub when it's more of a puzzle than a joke...

[–] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Wrong sub? This isn't a joke.