[Guest]

Here's a paradox I encountered in school:

The school was holding a Sports Day and each student was given a special costume for the same.

To help meet the expenses for the event, students who wanted to could pay for the costumes voluntarily.

A boy was trying to explain this fact to a teacher. However, he became too nervous and his explanation came out as a paradox:

"If you want to give [money for the costume] you can give; if you don't want to give, you can't give"!!

[roolstar]

What paradox?

[Guest]

its actually not a paradox- as it isnt contradicting

for example -someone who doesnt want to give is not allowed to give - while some1 who wants to can

[Guest]

I think the underlying philosophical premise is that you need to want to give in order to be able to give, so that it's essentially redundant to say you can give if you want to. According to the premise, it's impossible to give if you don't want to. But consider the child whose parent forces him to give (even though he finds it embarrassing, uncool, or undesirable to do so) -- now you have someone giving who doesn't want to. So the underlying premise is not correct.

In any event, I don't see the paradox either.

But consider a fine where the child who has done something wrong is compelled (let's assume it's against his will) to donate to a charity. Now you have a case where the child can only give if he doesn't want to. Is that a paradox?

[soop]

Yeah, I saw this on google homepage and it's not a paradox.

[Guest]

But consider a fine where the child who has done something wrong is compelled (let's assume it's against his will) to donate to a charity. Now you have a case where the child can only give if he doesn't want to. Is that a paradox?

Your case does not preclude voluntary donations.