On Logic

[sdi]

Lysimachus was having a party and had invited several of his philosopher friends to dine with him, including Theodorus the Atheist, Crates the Cynic, and his wife Hipparchia. Now, Ancient Athens was a patriachal society where women were expected to stay at home and tend their domestic tasks: for Hipparchia to aspire to philosophy was crass, and to accompany her husband on a social outing was scandalous. So Theodorus, not wishing to dine with a woman, criticised her as they sat to dinner, saying, "Shouldn't you be busy at your loom?"

Hipparchia replied, "Do you think I have made a made a poor trade in exchanging my weaving for philosophy?"

Theodorus, himself a philosopher, couldn't reply in the negative, and was embarrassed at being outwitted by a woman. So as to embarrass her, too, he pulled at her cloak, exposing her.

But Hipparchia showed no shame and apparently changed the subject. "Now, now, we're all philosophers here: such pettiness is beneath us. Let us spend our time in something more becoming, like logic. For example, consider this syllogism: the law applies equally to all—what is lawful for one to do is lawful for another to do. So what is lawful for Theodorus to do is lawful for Hipparchia to do. Now, it is certainly lawful for Theodorus to beat Theodorus. Therefore, it must also be lawful for Hipparchia to beat Theodorus." So saying, she socked Theodorus in the mouth.

Comments

[emmanuelg]

These are hilarious! I think the 2nd to last line should read, "Now it is certainly lawful for Theodorus to beat Hipparchia. Therefore it must also be lawful for Hipparchia to beat Theodorus...."

[sdi]

Thanks for flagging this! It is, in fact, correct: Hipparchia wasn't saying "what's good for the goose is good for the gander," she was saying, "it's (hypothetically) OK for you to engage in self-harm, so it must be (hypothetically) OK for me to harm you, too."

I'll ponder if there's a way to make that more clear...

[sdi]

Ah, I think it was how I framed her logical argument. I've edited it!