A Judge and a Philosopher Played Chess
A Judge and a Philosopher were playing chess. Following a long vacillation, the first one seemed to be ahead of the game. However, before making his last move – a checkmate – the Judge thought it would be unfair to humiliate his adversary by winning over. The one seeking truth must not be defeated by the one who is certain about truth. At least, not within the transcendental boundaries of such an intellectual game.
Within the few seconds of wait, the Philosopher sensed the doubts storming in the mind of his opponent. At first he was flattered but eventually got mad when, during the merciless combat, he was able to foresee his oncoming defeat. In fact, he tried to gain some time by making futile manoeuvres that ultimately failed to put a halt to the victorious advance of the Judge. It would be humiliating to win out of concession.
However, losing would indicate as well a spiritual inferiority.
The bet they had made before the match complicated things as the winner could ask the loser whatever he wished for. The Judge was wealthy, the Philosopher poor. So, it would be a good opportunity for the destitute thinker to improve his finances in the event of a win. Nevertheless, the Philosopher despised money. The servant of Themis also had a beautiful daughter, but the Philosopher scorned women as well. Which means in case he offered the match to his opponent the Judge had nothing to lose, neither had he anything to win if he defeated him. The very nature of this bet, however, indicated that the Philosopher did not wish to win.
Then, out of nowhere, appeared the Poet - whom many consider a mad man - and flipped over the chess board.