How Do You Know?
This is the usual follow-up question. Each of the answers below are sufficient by themselves to answer the question completely. 1. The same way you know it fell. 2. Ask the person how do they know the tree fell. If the person says they saw it fall but are asking you since you didn't, then say, since you were there, you do not need me to answer something you already know. 3. Ask the person how do they know the tree fell. If they say they didn't see it but it was standing when they left and on the ground when they returned, ask them again how do they know it fell? Their answer to your question is also your answer to their question. 4. Ask the person how do they know the tree fell. If they say it is obvious that a tree once standing and now on the ground must have fallen down, then you say, obvious also is the making of a sound by a tree falling down even if there is no one around. 5. Ask the person how do they know the tree fell. If they indicate they know it fell even though they were not there, then remind them they are relying upon natural laws (science) in posing the question, then so can you in answering the question. If natural laws hold true in the presence or absence of a person when a tree falls, it also holds true a tree will make a sound in the presence or absence of a person. 6. Ask the person, “Does a sound being made depend upon it being heard?”The second part of this, just for fun is, if the person if goofy enough to say “yes” to the first part, then ask if they heard you talking about them yesterday. 7. If you want to have even more fun with the person and they say they didn't see the tree fall down, ask them how do they know the tree didn't decide to lay down or someone else didn't lower the tree gently to the ground? These questions are as valid as theirs.
What I just realized is the main thing this riddle depends on - getting the unsuspecting person to accept apples and oranges as the same thing. If a person accepts the premise of the riddle which is part of the question, and then tries to answer the riddle without using the same premise, to analyze the riddle or the asker of the riddle, the person will be unable to solve the riddle. The person will allow themselves to be tricked by the riddle and by the asker because if a premise is valid in posing a question but it is not valid or not used in answering the question, an attempt will be made to answer an apple question with an orange. This always makes no sense.To say this another way, an orange answer is the correct answer but not in the context of the question. The question tries to confound by adding “if no one is around.” The asker reinforces this by asking the same thing another way: “how do you know?” The answers above avoid both traps of accepting a premise that applies to a question but is then not allowed to be applied to the answer.This riddle involves more intentional deceit than the chicken and egg riddle. 8. Ask the person, this two part question: “Are human ears the only ones capable of hearing sounds?” Are human ears the only ones that matter?” If you reach this point with the person and they answer “yes” to either question, you will already know to just walk away.
