Nomic: A Self-Modifying Game
Based on Reflexivity in Law
June, 1982
IN his excellent book A Profile of Mathematical Logic, the philosopher Howard
DeLong tells the following classic story of ancient Greece. "Protagoras had contracted to
teach Euathlus rhetoric so that he could become a lawyer. Euathlus initially paid only half
of the large fee, and they agreed that the second installment should be paid after Euathlus
had won his first case in court. Euathlus, however, delayed going into practice for quite
some time. Protagoras, worrying about his reputation as well as wanting the money,
decided to sue. In court Protagoras argued:
Euathlus maintains he should not pay me but this is absurd. For suppose he wins
this case. Since this is his maiden appearance in court he then ought to pay me
because he won his first case. On the other hand, suppose he loses his case. Then he
ought to pay me by the judgment of the court. Since he must either win or lose the
case he must pay me.
Euathlus had been a good student and was able to answer Protagoras' argument with a
similar one of his own:
Protagoras maintains that I should pay him but it is this which is absurd. For
suppose he wins this case. Since I will not have won my first case I do not need to
pay him according to our agreement. On the other hand, suppose he loses the case.
Then I do not have to pay him by judgment of the court. Since he must either win
or lose I do not have to pay him."
Then DeLong adds, "It is clear that to straighten out such puzzles one has to inquire
into general procedures of argument." Actually, to many people, it is not at all clear that
general procedures of argument will need scrutiny-quite the contrary. To many people,
paradoxes such as this one appear to be mere pimples or blemishes on the face of the law,
which can be removed by simple cosmetic surgery
BAD LOGIC ^^^^^^^^
..
To be in a decentralised world you wouldn't of even got to court REMEMBER you said you want no government in your lives the "BLOCKCHAIN" will sort it out ..
Protagoras had contracted to teach Euathlus rhetoric so that he could become a lawyer..
No need for lawyers decentralised REMEMBER
..No law to enforces it will the blockchain do it ?
..
My decision is Euathlus won the case .. FACT .. Why you ask?
Because they agreed that if he went into law and won his first case that Euathlus would pay the other half NOW Protagoras was being a GREEDY SHIT by dragging Euathlus into court SO this case is
irrelevant to the first case because you Protagoras decided to make the other case to benefit yourself
and by doing so you hurt the other person rather than him hurting you..
If he would of had a separate court case AND being a PRACTISING LAWYER then yes i would of awarded
the case to you Protagoras but you brought him here to trick the courts and by doing so you
Protagoras will be fined 5 thousand duckets
..GREEDY MAN ..wasting courts time
..
Your lucky Protagoras your not hanging on a cross like that jesus dude
..
Now get out my court you BUM..
But imagine decentralised ? NO GOOD JUDGE like popcorn1
..
NOW i make that 95 points to me in the game of NOMIC so roll the dice who is next?
Jeez your all only on 5 points
..First to 100 THE RULES REMEMBER ..NOMIC ..
First to 100 and POPCORN1 is on 95 points the rest on 5 points
..
YOU KNOW I WAS A FAIR JUDGE and right
..
