Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Euathlus must pay Protagoras the rest of the fees regardl... — Carmelics
    Home/Justice & Punishment
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Euathlus must pay Protagoras the rest of the fees regardless of the court's verdict.

    Justice & Punishment
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    2 reasons against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.If Euathlus loses the case, he must pay the rest of the fee on account of the verdict of the judges.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Euathlus wins the case, he must pay the rest of the fee on account of his prior agreement with Protagoras.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.The outcome of the case is either that Euathlus loses or that Euathlus wins.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.A contract requiring payment contingent on winning a case is void if a court of law adjudicates that no payment is owed, since judicial authority supersedes private agreements in matters brought before it.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Protagoras chose to submit the dispute to legal adjudication, thereby consenting to be bound by the court's verdict as the authoritative resolution of the contractual obligation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.One cannot simultaneously invoke a court's authority to enforce a claim and deny that court's power to rule against that same claim — doing so violates the principle of estoppel recognized from Roman law through Grotius.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The supporting argument commits the fallacy of false dilemma by ignoring a third outcome: the court may dismiss the case entirely or declare the contract unenforceable, yielding no payment obligation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Aulus Gellius, who preserves this paradox in Noctes Atticae, treats it as a genuine antinomy precisely because neither horn of the dilemma yields a determinate legal obligation, suggesting the contract is indeterminate rather than doubly binding.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An obligation that is allegedly enforced by contradictory grounds simultaneously — verdict and pre-verdict agreement — produces a legal nullity, as Leibniz argued in his early jurisprudential work on the logic of conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Topics

    Justice & PunishmentSocial Contract

    Connections

    1 topic

    Modality & Possibility1 linked

    Related

    A contract requiring payment contingent on winning a case is void if a court of ...An obligation that is allegedly enforced by contradictory grounds simultaneously...Aulus Gellius, who preserves this paradox in Noctes Atticae, treats it as a genu...If Euathlus loses the case, he must pay the rest of the fee on account of the ve...
    +5 moreShow less
    If Euathlus wins the case, he must pay the rest of the fee on account of his pri...One cannot simultaneously invoke a court's authority to enforce a claim and deny...Protagoras chose to submit the dispute to legal adjudication, thereby consenting...The outcome of the case is either that Euathlus loses or that Euathlus wins.The supporting argument commits the fallacy of false dilemma by ignoring a third...

    Similar

    If Euathlus loses the case, he must pay the rest of the fee on account...83%If Euathlus wins the case, he must pay the rest of the fee on account ...78%If Euathlus loses, refusing to obey the judges' sentence shows contemp...76%The judges were not obliged to refrain from passing judgment in the ca...69%

    Source

    AI-extracted1/3 agreementValid
    SEP: lorenzo-valla
    View source passageHide passage
    In medieval times, dilemma does not seem to have attracted much theoretical reflection, though there was an extensive literature on related genres such as insolubilia and paradoxes, which were generally treated in a logical manner. It is, therefore, interesting to see Valla discussing a whole range of examples of dilemma. The rhetoric textbook by the Byzantine émigré George of Trebizond (1396–1486), composed about 1433, was probably an important source for him. This work might also have led Vall
    Extraction notes

    Validity: Extracted via Max plan + API grounding/validity checks

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    3 (1 for, 2 against)
    Edits
    1 edit