Curso completo de Raciocínio Lógico para Concursos Públicos 2019 Aula 17

Mari Concursos

1 Jul 201308:47

Summary

TLDRThe script presents a logical reasoning exercise involving a mystery about who ate the last slice of cake and who broke a vase. Characters named Bruna, Carol, Aline, Walison, Bosco, Kleber, and Daniel are involved, each making statements that either accuse or deny their involvement. The narrative walks through different hypotheses to deduce the truth-teller and the culprit in both scenarios. The exercise is a lesson in critical thinking, using deduction to resolve the conflicts in statements and identify the guilty party.

Takeaways

😀 The script is a lesson on logical reasoning involving a case study about who ate the last slice of cake.
🔍 Three individuals, Aline, Bruna, and Carol, are suspected of eating the cake, and they make contradictory statements.
📝 Aline accuses Bruna of eating the cake, Bruna denies it and accuses Aline of lying, and Carol simply states she didn't do it.
🕵️‍♂️ The task is to deduce who is telling the truth and who ate the cake based on their statements.
🤔 The script suggests a methodical approach to eliminate possibilities and identify the one who is lying.
📉 The first hypothesis is that Aline is lying, which is discarded because it doesn't fit the scenario where only one person is lying.
📉 The second hypothesis is that Bruna ate the cake and is lying, but this is also discarded as it leads to a contradiction.
📉 The final hypothesis is that Carol ate the cake, which fits the scenario where only one person is lying and the others are telling the truth.
🏁 The conclusion is that Carol is the one who ate the cake, as it is the only scenario that doesn't create a contradiction among the statements.
📚 The script also introduces a similar problem involving a broken vase and statements from Walison, Bosco, Kleber, and Daniel.
👀 The method used in the cake scenario is suggested to be applied to the vase scenario to find out who broke it.

Q & A

What is the main subject of the lesson in the transcript?
-The main subject of the lesson is logical reasoning and problem-solving related to a case study involving a cake incident at the Carlos Chagas Foundation.
What is the first case presented in the lesson about?
-The first case is about determining who ate the last slice of the grandmother's cake, with three suspects: Bruna, Carol, and Aline, and their respective statements.
What is the logical approach used to solve the cake case?
-The logical approach involves formulating hypotheses about who ate the cake and analyzing the truthfulness of each person's statement to deduce who is lying and who is telling the truth.
According to the transcript, who is suspected of eating the last slice of the cake?
-Initially, Bruna and Carol are suspected of eating the last slice of the cake.
What statement does Bruna make in response to the accusation?
-Bruna states that Aline is lying, implying that Aline is the one who ate the cake.
What is the conclusion of the first case in the transcript?
-The conclusion is that Carol is the one who ate the cake, as she is the one lying about not having eaten it.
What is the second case presented in the lesson?
-The second case involves determining who broke a vase at home, with four suspects: Bosco, Alves, Kleber, and Daniel.
What statement does Alisson make regarding the vase incident?
-Alisson claims that Bosco is the one who broke the vase.
What logical reasoning is applied to solve the vase case?
-The logical reasoning involves analyzing each suspect's statement and cross-referencing them to determine who is telling the truth and who is lying.
What is the significance of the approach used in solving these cases?
-The approach is significant as it teaches students how to apply logical reasoning to analyze statements and solve problems involving truth and deception.
How does the transcript suggest improving the problem-solving process?
-The transcript suggests improving the process by formulating all hypotheses first and then analyzing each statement, which can make the analysis more efficient.

Outlines

00:00

🕵️‍♂️ Deductive Reasoning in a Cake Theft Scenario

The first paragraph presents a deductive reasoning exercise involving a cake theft. Three individuals, Aline, Bruna, and Carol, are suspected of eating the last slice of their grandmother's cake. Each person makes a statement: Aline accuses Bruna, Bruna denies it and accuses Aline, and Carol simply denies involvement. The paragraph walks through the process of elimination to determine who is lying and who is telling the truth, concluding that Carol is the one who ate the cake based on the logical deduction that only one person can be telling the truth.

05:01

🏺 The Vase Breakage Mystery

In the second paragraph, a similar deductive reasoning scenario unfolds with a broken vase. Four individuals, Walison, Alves, Bosco, and Kleber, are questioned by Walison's mother about the incident. Each person provides a statement: Walison accuses Bosco, Bosco denies it, Kleber also denies it, and Daniel claims his innocence. The paragraph explores the logical possibilities to determine who broke the vase, considering that only one person is telling the truth. The summary includes the analysis of each person's statement and concludes with the deduction process, although the final culprit is not explicitly stated in the provided text.

Mindmap

Keywords

💡Hypothesis

A hypothesis is an assumption or proposition made as a basis for reasoning, in this video script, it is used to explore different scenarios regarding who ate the last slice of cake or broke the vase. The script uses the term to discuss the logical process of elimination to find out the truth.

💡Truth

Truth, in the context of this script, refers to the accurate statement or fact that only one among the characters is telling. The script revolves around discerning who is telling the truth to solve the mystery, which is central to the video's theme of logical deduction.

💡Lie

A lie is a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive, which is a key element in the script. The characters' lies are what create the mystery, and the script discusses how to identify the liar to uncover the truth.

💡Deduction

Deduction is the process of reasoning from one or more statements (premises) to reach a logically certain conclusion. The script is centered around the use of deductive reasoning to solve the puzzles presented, such as who ate the cake or broke the vase.

💡Logic

Logic is the systematic method of correct reasoning, which is fundamental to the script's narrative. The characters use logical reasoning to analyze statements and determine which one is the truth among the lies.

💡Statement

A statement in this script refers to the declarations made by the characters regarding the events. The analysis of these statements is crucial for the logical process of identifying the truth-teller.

💡Character

Characters are the individuals involved in the narrative of the script. Each character's actions and statements are scrutinized to determine who is lying and who is telling the truth, which is essential to the video's storyline.

💡Mystery

Mystery in the script represents the unknown or unresolved elements of the story, such as who ate the cake or broke the vase. The script is structured around solving these mysteries through logical reasoning.

💡Innocent

In the context of the script, being innocent means not being guilty of the act in question. The characters claim their innocence, and part of the script's narrative is to determine who is genuinely innocent and who is falsely claiming it.

💡Guilt

Guilt in the script refers to the responsibility or blame for a wrongdoing, such as eating the last slice of cake or breaking a vase. The script involves identifying the character who is actually guilty based on their statements and actions.

💡Analysis

Analysis in the script is the detailed examination of the characters' statements to determine the truth. It is a key process used throughout the script to solve the puzzles presented.

Highlights

Introduction to logical reasoning exercise involving a cake scenario.

Three individuals are suspected of eating the last piece of cake.

Aline accuses Bruna of eating the cake, while Bruna denies it.

Carol claims she did not eat the cake, creating a dilemma of who is lying.

The first hypothesis is that Bruna ate the cake and is lying about it.

The second hypothesis suggests that Aline is lying, not Bruna.

A third hypothesis is considered, where Carol is the one who ate the cake.

Logical deduction is used to determine which hypothesis is most plausible.

The process of elimination is applied to find the one telling the truth.

A methodical approach to analyzing each person's statement is described.

The conclusion is that Carol is the one who ate the cake, based on the given statements.

Introduction of a new scenario involving a broken vase.

Four individuals are accused, and their statements are analyzed for truth.

Alisson's statement implicates Bosco as the one who broke the vase.

Bosco and Kleber provide alibis, while Daniel claims innocence.

The logical reasoning process is applied to deduce who broke the vase.

Each person's statement is cross-referenced to find inconsistencies.

The conclusion of the vase scenario is pending further analysis.