Does everybody want a drink?
The third logician answers:
The first says "I don't know" because he wants a drink, but doesn't know if everybody wants one. If the first didn't want a drink, he would have answered "No".
Same for the second, he wants a drink but doesn't know if the third wants one.
So, the third answers "Yes" if he ...
If the first were sober s/he would answer yes. So the first is drunk.
If the second were sober s/he would answer yes. So the second is drunk.
If the third were sober s/he would answer yes. The third now has enough information to answer "no", but is too drunk to realise it.
To solve this puzzle, note the key word in the text:
If we employ this on each of the three parts of the puzzle text, we can get the following:
So the reason your puzzle was closed is because it seems like you were telling us:
So please provide suitable attribution!! ;-)
At a minimum, one logician - the final one - must be drunk.
The first two can reasonably say they don't know if
they cannot drive but
they think one of the later logicians might
The last one knows none of the prior logicians can drive, their answer should be "yes" or "no" according to their own ability. The fact that they do not answer thus means they ...
Almost all of the correct words to insert have been suggested in other users' answers, just not all together. However, I believe the true combination is:
How do we interpret this?
This is of course a reference to:
WARNING: PUN INCOMING!
You can never truly 'know how many people can fit on the floor of an opera house' because:
And because it always makes it funnier when you explain a joke:
This also fits with the title, since:
First, some basic deductions:
And repeat again:
And now we come to an interesting step:
Now we can do something else similar, after a bit more work:
These steps complete the puzzle with just the usual deductions afterwards. About halfway through, it looks like this:
And the solutions to the puzzles:
Now, overlaying the two puzzles, we see ...