| Paradox Of The Court |
Article Index for Paradox Of |
Website Links For Paradox |
Information AboutParadox Of The Court |
| CATEGORIES ABOUT PARADOX OF THE COURT | |
| paradoxes | |
|
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? ANALYSIS From a moral standpoint it may be that either party was right, or that both were, or weren't, due to the ambiguous nature of the scenario. However, as a matter of law, if the Court were to rule in favor of Protagoras, the conditions of the original contract between him and his pupil would be invalid and Euathlus would have to pay Protagoras. If on the other hand Euathlus were to win, by law and supremacy the Court's ruling would suspend Euathlus's obligation of payment indeterminately. How, from an objective standpoint, the Court could make its ruling is not necessarily a paradox either. The Court would either rule that Euathlus (as the defendant) had violated the terms of the contract, or had not. The subsequent conundrum would have no legal bearing on the court's decision. In some civil cases the respondent, if he receives the favor of the court, is also shielded from payments associated with the act of going to court. The Court could indeed rule that Protagoras, as the unsuccessful plaintiff, pay Euathlus the amount which it cost to win. In this case, Euathlus would pay Protagoras only to have the money returned by order of the court. The original contract would have been fulfilled, and Euathlus would bear no further obligation to pay Protagoras for his instruction. The net outcome for Protagoras would be to lose his case, receive payment per the original contract, and then have to pay for the defendant's loses due to his failed suit (Which would be equal to, or exceeding, the cost of Euathlus's education.) NOTES |
|
|