Abstract
Molière, the famous French author, wrote an incisive comedy entitled "The Forced Marriage" (1). The play, which had been written at the request of King Louis XIV, was an immediate success, and occasionally France's most opulent king even participated in its presentation. This comedy addresses some of the foibles of humanity in a humorous, but instructive and not so subtle, context. In the story, a rich, mature gentleman wonders whether he should marry a young maiden who is primarily interested in his wealth. He seeks the advice of several individuals, including two philosophers. The first philosopher is Aristotelian and is so concerned about his own opinions, his philosophy, and the definitions of terms that the poor gentleman cannot communicate to him the reality of his practical problem. He departs disappointed and seeks advice from a skeptic philosopher. In introducing himself he informs this philosopher that he has come for advice; whereupon the philosopher replies: "Pray change this mode of speaking Our philosophy enjoins us not to enunciate a positive proposition, but to speak of everything dubiously, and always to suspend our judgment. For this reason, you should not say, I am come, but it seems that I am come." An extended discussion follows as to whether the gentleman has really come or if it only appears that he has come. Further factual statements from the gentleman are met with deprecating comments such as "it may be so", or "it is not impossible", and "that may be." The philosopher refuses to address the gentleman's real question. Tension arises, and compelling reality suddenly appears when the exasperated "gentleman" attacks the philosopher who responds with yells and vexed comments. Informing the gentleman that it is an insolence and outrage to beat a philosopher like him, he threatens to appeal to the magistrate. The gentleman appropriately answers: "Pray, correct this manner of speaking. We are to doubt everything; and you ought not to say that I have beaten you, but it seems I have beaten you." Subsequent argumentation provides the gentleman with further opportunity to reply to the philosopher with the same uncertain statements he has just heard. The philosopher, who is positive that he has been beaten, rehears comments such as "it may be so" and "it is not impossible." The gentleman is proudly instructing the philosopher about the foibles of skepticism.