Question Author
Maude: Please pay attention. (1) I did not ask you to explain the Medes/Persians quotation. I perfectly well understand the way in which the Medes/Persians quotation can be interpreted in two different ways, by having each of the two nouns as the subject and/or the object. You do not need to explain it to me again, because I understood it the first time. (2) What I do not understand, however, is how the sory of the Medes and the Persians supposedly has any relevance to the "That Man's Father" riddle. (3) Please bear in mind that I did not ask the riddle itself, because I already know the correct answer to the riddle (as I said in the original question). What I asked is why the riddle is so often misunderstood by so many people, such as yourself. (4) If you still do not understand the correct answer to the riddle, then please re-read carefully the excellent explanation given by LordAlmighty a few messages up the list. (5) The fact that the man who is speaking has no brothers or sisters confirms that the portrait is of the son of the man who is speaking, and that it is not his nephew. (6) So I ask again: (7) What is the relevance of the story about the Medes and the Persians? (8) Please explain why you think that the man is looking at a portrait of himself? (9) Yes, I would like to know the "mathematical statement" to which you refer, although I doubt if it will help. (10) Most of the people who have replied to this answer will regard your reference to me as "barking" as being insulting and offensive, as well as inaccurate. Please remember that it is I who have been entirely consistent throughout this thread, and it is you (not I) who have misunderstood the riddle.