Since two of them are the same, you have a 50% chance of picking something that is 33% of the possible answers. The other two, you have 25% chance of picking something that us 33% of the possible answers.

So 50%33% + 2 (33%*25%)= 33%

So your chances of being right is 33% cause there is effectively 3 choices.

I argue it's still 25%, because the answer is either a,b,c, or d, you can only choose 1, regardless of the possible answer having two slots.

Can I take a 50/50 joker first?

I asked Google to roll a D4 and it rolled a 4. So my answer (correct or not) when following the directions in the question is the fourth one (D).

It's 0%, because 0% isn't on the list and therefore you have no chance of picking it. It's the only answer consistent with itself. All other chances cause a kind of paradox-loop.

This only produces a paradox if you fall for the usual fallacy that "at random" necessarily means "with uniform probability".

For example, I would pick an answer at random by rolling a fair cubic die and picking a) if it rolls a 1, b) on a 2, d) on a 3 or c) otherwise so for me the answer is c) 50%.

However, as it specifies that you are to pick at random the existence, uniqueness and value of the correct answer depends on the specific distribution you choose.

60%

This is a self-referential paradox — a classic logic puzzle designed to be tricky. Let’s break it down:

Step-by-step analysis:

1. How many choices? There are 4 possible answers, so if we pick one randomly, the chance of picking any specific one is 1 in 4 = 25%.

2. How many answers say “25%”? Two.

3. That means the probability of randomly choosing an answer that says “25%” is 2 in 4 = 50%.

4. But if the correct answer is 50%, then only one option says “50%” — which is (c). So the probability of picking it at random is 1 in 4 = 25%, contradicting the idea that 50% is correct.

5. If the correct answer is 25%, then two options say that — a and d. So the chance of picking one of those at random is 50%, not 25% — again a contradiction.

6. Similarly, if 60% is correct (only one option), then the chance of picking it randomly is 25%, which again makes it incorrect.

Conclusion: Any choice leads to a contradiction. This is a self-referential paradox, meaning the question breaks logical consistency. There is no consistent correct answer.

This seems like a version of the Liar paradox. Assume "this statement is false" is true. Is the statement true or false?

There are a bunch of ways to break the paradox, but they all require using a system that doesn't allow it to exist. For example, a system where truth is a percentage so a statement being 50% true is allowed.

For this question, one way to break the paradox would be to say that multiple choice answers must all be unique and repeated answers are ignored. Using that rule, this question only has the answers a) 25%, b) 60%, and c) 50%, and none of them are correct. There's a 0% chance of getting the correct answer.

50/50, you either guess it right or you dont

B) 60% because I'm generally very lucky.

If you suppose a multiple choice test MUST ONLY have one correct answer:

1. Eliminate duplicate 25% answers

2. You are left with 60% and 50% as potential answers to this question.

3. C is the answer

If you were to actually select an answer at random to this question while believing the above, you would have a 50% chance of answering 25%.

It is obvious to postulate that: for all multiple choice questions with no duplicate answers, there is a 25% chance of selecting the correct answer.

However as you can see, in order to integrate the answer being C with the question itself, we have to destroy the constraints of the solution and treat the duplicate 25% answers as one sum correct answer.

Do you choose to see the multiple choice answer space as an expression of the infinite space of potential free form answers? Was the answer to the question itself an expression of multiple choice probability or was it the answer from the free form answer space condensed into the multiple choice answer space?

The question demonstrates arriving at different answers between inductive and deductive reasoning. The answer depends on whether we are taking the answers and working backwards or taking the question and working forwards. The question itself forces the inductive reasoning strategy to falter at the duplicate answers, leading to deductive reasoning being the remaining strategy. Some may choose to say "there is no answer" in the presence of needing to answer a question that only has an answer because we are forced to pick one option, and otherwise would be invalid. Some may choose to point out it is obviously a paradox.

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh