Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

A good old Paradox P2

The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2012 12:13:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
You have been assigned Governor by the King DDO town.
You are presented with many problems as governor. Your first morning as governor you are told that it was your task to preside in court, and the first case arose from a law concerning the use of a bridge leading from one parish to another.

The landowner had made a decree:
"Whoever passes over this bridge from one side to the other, must first take an oath whence he comes and what business he is going about. If he swears true, let him pass, but if he tell a lie, he shall die for it upon the gallows, without any remission. "

This law served well enough for many years, until one day a man stood before the bridge and declared:

"By the oath I have taken, I swear I am going to die upon the gallows which stand yonder, and that this is my business, and no other.

The bridge-keepers were set in a quandary by this; and they are appealing to you for the ruling. For if they let the man cross the bridge, he would have sworn falsely and lied, and so should have been hanged. Whereas if they hanged him, he would have sworn truly, and so should have been allowed to pass over the bridge.
As governor, what to do, what to DOOO?
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2012 12:39:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
A) Refuse him passage
B) Let him pass and then kill him on the gallows. I don't see the logical error in killing him, all you mentioned is that he "should have been allowed to pass" so let him pass then kill him.
Rob
caveat
Posts: 2,137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2012 12:59:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
There is no paradox here.
The man came to die upon the gallows, not cross the bridge. You don't even have to kill him yourself.
There is an art, it says, or rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss. " Clearly, it is this second part, the missing, which presents the difficulties.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2012 1:06:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/19/2012 12:59:00 PM, caveat wrote:
There is no paradox here.
The man came to die upon the gallows, not cross the bridge. You don't even have to kill him yourself.

The Fool: But they 'stand yonder'
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2012 1:14:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/19/2012 1:06:17 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 7/19/2012 12:59:00 PM, caveat wrote:
There is no paradox here.
The man came to die upon the gallows, not cross the bridge. You don't even have to kill him yourself.

The Fool: But they 'stand yonder'

Still no paradox, as the primary two events are mutually exclusive. It's a botch of the original Sufi teachings. Nusradin, if I remember correctly.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2012 1:52:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It's not a paradox, it's a tautology. If it is truly his business to die upon the gallows, then you let him pass, as per the law. He passes, then goes to die upon the gallows.

If he is lying, then he still dies upon the gallows, as per the law.

Either way, he dies.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2012 2:14:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/19/2012 1:14:23 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 7/19/2012 1:06:17 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 7/19/2012 12:59:00 PM, caveat wrote:
There is no paradox here.
The man came to die upon the gallows, not cross the bridge. You don't even have to kill him yourself.

The Fool: But they 'stand yonder'

Still no paradox, as the primary two events are mutually exclusive.

It's a botch of the original Sufi teachings. Nusradin, if I remember correctly.

The Fool:What is a botch.??
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2012 2:22:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/19/2012 1:14:23 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 7/19/2012 1:06:17 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 7/19/2012 12:59:00 PM, caveat wrote:
There is no paradox here.
The man came to die upon the gallows, not cross the bridge. You don't even have to kill him yourself.

The Fool: But they 'stand yonder'

Still no paradox, as the primary two events are mutually exclusive. It's a botch of the original Sufi teachings. Nusradin, if I remember correctly.

The Fool: no its from that. glad to have you back . but pls stop that.
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/19/2012 2:26:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 7/19/2012 2:22:28 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 7/19/2012 1:14:23 PM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
At 7/19/2012 1:06:17 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 7/19/2012 12:59:00 PM, caveat wrote:
There is no paradox here.
The man came to die upon the gallows, not cross the bridge. You don't even have to kill him yourself.

The Fool: But they 'stand yonder'

Still no paradox, as the primary two events are mutually exclusive. It's a botch of the original Sufi teachings. Nusradin, if I remember correctly.

The Fool: no its from that. glad to have you back . but pls stop that.

Typo: its not from that. I mean. ;)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL