Entirely abstract challenges - like chess playing or mathematics (but not formal logic for some unaccountable reason) - have mostly been unpleasant uphill battles for me, not few of which, mind you, I have won. Maybe that is why I like the somewhat unfair denigration (below) of analytic problem solving as mere exercise for the drudge, as opposed to the arty ingenuity required by insight problem solving, which latter I like to think a practice more up my street.
While I did not spent much time guessing, the fact remains, I did not even come close to finding the answer to the riddle of the criminal coin.
Analytic problems generally require people to “grind out a solution” by systematically working through the problem utilizing a consistent strategy. Here is a classic analytic problem: "Bob’s father is 3 times as old as Bob. They were both born in October. 4 years ago, he was 4 times older. How old are Bob and his father?" No innovation or creativity necessary to solve this problem; one simply has to work it out mathematically.
Insight problems, on the other hand, often initially mislead the solver. Finding the right answer requires the solver to abandon the original interpretation and seek alternatives. Insight problems often involve an "Aha!" moment where the answer comes all at once, rather than via a systematic, incremental calculation. Here is a classic insight problem: "A dealer in antique coins got an offer to buy a beautiful bronze coin. The coin had an emperor's head on one side and the date 544 BC stamped on the other. The dealer examined the coin, but instead of buying it, he called the police. Why?"
The source.
