Author Topic: Protagoras VS Euathlus paradox  (Read 375 times)

kav

  • www.Roulette30.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1685
  • Thanked: 714 times
  • Gender: Male
Protagoras VS Euathlus paradox
« on: November 07, 2016, 05:18:30 AM »
The Paradox of the Court is a very old problem in logic stemming from ancient Greece. It is said that the famous sophist Protagoras took on a pupil, Euathlus, on the understanding that the student pay Protagoras for his instruction after he had won his first case.

Some accounts claim that Protagoras demanded his payment and sued Euthalus for the amount owed as soon as Euathlus completed his education.

 Protagoras argued that if he won the case he would be paid his money. If Euathlus won the case, Protagoras would still be paid according to the original contract, because Euathlus would have won his first case.

Euathlus, however, claimed that if he won then by the court’s decision he would not have to pay Protagoras. If on the other hand Protagoras won then Euathlus would still not have won a case and therefore not be obliged to pay. The question is: which of the two men is in the right?


 
The following users thanked this post: Reyth

Reyth

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3318
  • Thanked: 979 times
Re: Protagoras VS Euathlus paradox
« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2016, 01:03:28 PM »
Euathlus, however, claimed that if he won then by the court’s decision he would not have to pay Protagoras.

This is the crux of the problem.  He would of course have to argue that the contract was not valid and thus not binding, otherwise the court must rule against him.
 
The following users thanked this post: kav

scepticus

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1812
  • Thanked: 379 times
Re: Protagoras VS Euathlus paradox
« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2016, 01:31:50 PM »
I think that the Court would have to decide  on exactly what the terms of the contract meant .
If Euathlus 's FIRST case was in defence of Protagoras ' s claim and he lost then he is correct in thinking that he need not Pay the fee claimed..
The Court , though, may decide that his interpretation of the contract is wrong and rule in Protagoras's favour. This would mean that Euathlus would have to pay Protagoras ' Court case as well as the fee in dispute .
I think Euathlus needs a lawyer  !
 
The following users thanked this post: kav, Reyth