Even after looking it up, I still barely understand.
In: Other
basically, its two, technically contradictory, lines of reasoning, that lead to the same conclusion. the idea is no matter what you plead, the outcome is the same
So, Morton goes to a noble and says “you need to pay the King taxes”.
**Argument A**: “but sir, I cant pay, i spent all my money on these fancy clothes and fine dining”
Morton: “ah, so you have money to burn? *you must have lots of money for the King, then*!”
**Argument B:** “but sir, i can’t pay, look at how badly i dress, and how modest my meals are!”
Morton: “ah, so you dont spend much? *you must have lots of money for the King, then!”*
It’s a logical paradox.
An example: you need something that can only be acquired by not being in the very situation.
A common example given is a witch trial:
You’re strapped to a chair and thrown in water.
If you drown you weren’t a witch. If you float, you’re a witch and they drown you.
If you have to pick from two different solutions to a problem; and they both lead to an equally bad outcome – that is Morton’s fork
The first google result is really on point:
From Les miserables-
If I speak I am condemned
If I stay silent I am damned
No third option is presented so it’s a false dilemma of choices and both outcomes harm the protagonist
This is not an ELI5 response, this is the first I’ve ever heard of Morton’s fork. So….its more of a compounding question maybe? Or request for clarification? Based on the answers so far, what is the difference between a Catch-22 and a Morton’s fork?
“If you spend lots of money, then you must have lots of money to spend, so the King can collect high taxes from you. Meanwhile, if you spend very little money, you must be saving your money, so the King can collect high taxes from you.”
While this was sometimes used to bully the poor, it was mostly used against the nobility and gentry, especially in Wales, which created resentment. Given the issues with it primarily arose *after* Archbishop John Morton’s death, it actually seems that it was Henry VII who was responsible, and Morton had if anything *restrained* his King’s greed.
Latest Answers