Advertisement

# Commitment, Contract and Ranges of Legal Action

Chapter
• 84 Downloads
Part of the Synthese Library book series (SYLI, volume 112)

## Abstract

The theory presented in this chapter deals with statements of the kind
$$\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} {\left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} {\mathcal{A}(p,\langle p,F\rangle ) = \{ T,T\prime , \ldots \} ,} \hfill \\ {p'{\text{s range}} {\text{of}} {\text{action}} {\text{with}} {\text{respect}} {\text{to}} \langle p,F\rangle = \{ T,T\prime , \ldots \} ,} \hfill \\ \end{array} } \right.} \hfill \\ {\left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} {\mathcal{A}(p + q,\langle p,F\rangle ) = \{ T,T\prime , \ldots \} ,} \hfill \\ {{\text{The}} {\text{range}} {\text{of}} {\text{action}} {\text{of}} p + q {\text{with}} {\text{respect}} {\text{to}} \langle p F\rangle = \{ T,T\prime , \ldots \} ,} \hfill \\ \end{array} } \right.} \hfill \\ {\left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} {{{\mathcal{A}}^{R}}(p + q,\langle p,q,F\rangle ) = \{ R,R\prime , \ldots \} ,} \hfill \\ {{\text{The}} {\text{range}} {\text{of}} {\text{actio}}{{{\text{n}}}^{{\text{R}}}} {\text{of}} p + q {\text{with}} respect to } \hfill \\ {\langle p,q,F\rangle = \{ R,R\prime , \ldots \} ,} \hfill \\ \end{array} } \right.} \hfill \\ {\left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}} {{{\mathcal{A}}^{S}}(p + q,\langle p,q,F\rangle ) = \{ S,S\prime , \ldots \} ,} \hfill \\ {{\text{The}} {\text{range}} {\text{of}} {\text{actio}}{{{\text{n}}}^{{\text{S}}}} {\text{of}} p + q {\text{with}} {\text{respect}} {\text{to}}} \hfill \\ {\langle p,q,F\rangle = \{ S,S\prime , \ldots \} ,} \hfill \\ \end{array} } \right.} \hfill \\ \end{array}$$
where statements in each pair here are synomymous. As before, T,T′, … denote one-agent types, R, R′, … individualistic two-agent types and S, S′, … collectivistic two-agent types, and this notation will be understood throughout this chapter. The statements at issue here concern the area in which one or two agents may change his or their own legal situation with respect to a certain state of affairs. It is usual in traditional legal philosophy and jurisprudence to say that these statements deal with the autonomy of an agent p or p + q (cf. p. 213 for Ross’ distinction between heteronomous and autonomous competence). Since A, AR and AS are functions, with a given value for a given argument, the same idea can be expressed by saying that the arguments forA, AR and AS have a certain structure. A glance at the statements in question shows that the arguments have one of the forms
$$\langle p,\langle p,F\rangle \rangle ,$$
(i)
$$\langle p + q,\langle p,F\rangle \rangle ,$$
(ii)
$$\langle p + q,\langle p,q,F\rangle \rangle ,$$
(iii)
where each agent variable occurring in the second argument place also occurs within the first argument place. Moreover, each expression in the first argument place is either an agent variable or an expression built up from agent variables with the operator +.

## Keywords

Legal Action Maximal Range Hasse Diagram Legal Situation Argument Place
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

## Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

## Copyright information

© D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland 1977

## Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available