It seems the Monty Hall/Baysian/Restricted choice problem is going around again, and dredging up some of the old discussions, like this one by Dean Esmay.
I was introduced to this puzzle some twenty years ago, and I'm still waiting for a convincing explanation of the correct answer.
Once you get it, of course, the explanations that everybody has been throwing at you start to make sense, but somehow those explanations fail to address the inherent contradictions that block recognition of the correct solution.
It might help to work up to the solution. Suppose Monty always opens door #2 when the rules allow him to do so. It may be easy to see that switching breaks even when he opens door #2, but is a guaranteed win if he opens door #3. Or to show how the problem is different if Monty opens a door before the player makes any choice.
What alarms me is the human tendency to prefer being right to being correct. I suppose it is an issue of comfort, or risk. That, somehow, reevaluating your assumptions is dangerous....
April 8, 2003 11:52 AM
| TrackBack