Read this and tell me if there's a solution for this problem or who is correct and who is wrong!!
Few centuries 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. And if I lose the case, student will still pay me because he would have won his first case. So either way I will have to get the money".
Equally brilliant 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. So either way, I am not going to pay the teacher anything".
This is one of the greatest paradoxes ever recorded in history..
Few centuries 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. And if I lose the case, student will still pay me because he would have won his first case. So either way I will have to get the money".
Equally brilliant 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. So either way, I am not going to pay the teacher anything".
This is one of the greatest paradoxes ever recorded in history..
Read somewhere....a blog? not sure
ReplyDeleteA guy was hired by an MNC, for a promised 7 digit p.a. but after one year, his pay has been reduced to 6 digit.
The Co. says, he is an underperformer.
Why keep an underperformer in the office and pay 6 digit?
Guy says, the co. was ready to pay when he didn't know anything, but now the co.'s expectation has grown, for which the guy is paying the debt.
The guy cribs he is not paid what he was promised.
Why stay there?
The company says, we paid him when he didn't know anything but when the Co. wants to know something new, he is underperforming...
But both want both..
This is the current scenario
Neither all underperformers leave the Co. on their own nor are they sent out by the Co.
The guys want to work in an MNC but cannot live up to their expected standards all the times
But both still work together !!!!
And according to law..u will have to pay all those who read this...
ReplyDelete