[GeorgeRichard]

> Imagine you are given two identical envelopes, each containing money. One contains twice as much as the other. You may pick one envelope and keep the money it contains. Having chosen an envelope at will, but before inspecting it, you are given the chance to switch envelopes. Should you switch?

Unless the imaginary “giver” shows you what was in the other imaginary envelope you’ll never know. We don’t even know if this imaginary person is telling the truth. How do you know that “One contains twice as much as the other?”

I have never been offered a choice of cash containing envelopes in my life – maybe because I have never worked in a job where bribes could be usefully employed.

The whole “problem” is about as worthwhile a subject of contemplation as, say, “Do flying pigs taste more like partridge than earth-bound pigs?”

Does anyone know of a paradox that works/exists in the real world? I mean something a bit more substantial than whether some random dude claims to be a liar and you supposedly bother to wonder whether or not he’s telling the truth.

[cedilla]

It's a thought experiment. It's not about envelopes of cash, it's about logic and game theory. Their usefullness can hardly be overstated.

But for what it's worth, there are a ton of thought experiments inspired by or lifted from the real world. The Monty hall problem is taken from a game show - it even has a contestant who must choose one of three doors...

[GeorgeRichard]

Why is it a thought experiment? After all envelopes, cash, experimenters etcetera exist. It could be a real experiment. On the other hand what theory or hypothesis would it be testing?

What’s the problem with Monty Hall? The solution (switch to the other door) is demonstrably true. I believe it’s called a veridical paradox.