Many
years ago, a Law teacher came across a student who was willing to learn but was
unable to pay the fees. The student struck a deal saying, "I will pay your
fee the day I win my first case in the court".
Teacher
agreed and proceeded with the law course. When the course was finished and
teacher started pestering the student to pay up the fee, the student reminded
him of the deal and pushed days.
Fed up with this, the teacher decided
to sue the student in the court of law and both of them decided to argue for
themselves.
The
teacher put forward his argument saying:
"If I win this case, as per the court of law, the student has to pay me as the case is about his non-payment of dues.
"If I win this case, as per the court of law, the student has to pay me as the case is about his non-payment of dues.
And if I lose the case, the student will still pay me because he would have won his first case...
So either way I will get the money".
Equally
brilliant, the student argued back saying:
"If I win the case, as per the court of law, I don't have to pay anything to the teacher as the case is about my non-payment of dues.
And if I lose the case, I don't have to pay him because I haven't won my first case yet....
"If I win the case, as per the court of law, I don't have to pay anything to the teacher as the case is about my non-payment of dues.
And if I lose the case, I don't have to pay him because I haven't won my first case yet....
So either way, I am not going to pay the teacher anything".
This
is one of the greatest paradoxes ever recorded.
Who is
right and who is the winner?
This
is part of ancient Greek history. The lawyer teacher was Protagoras (c.485-415
BCE) and the student was Euthalos. This is known as Protagoras's Paradox.