Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=664611
 
 

Footnotes (74)



 


 



Duty and Consequence: A Non-Conflating Theory of Promise and Contract


Jeffrey M. Lipshaw


Suffolk University Law School


Cumberland Law Review, Vol. 36, Forthcoming

Abstract:     
I argue that the debate between deontologists and consequentialists of contract law conflates and therefore unduly confuses the analysis of each of them. The debate is a reprise of the philosophic debate between rationalists and empiricists. Present-day legal contract consequentialists (in the empirical tradition) see reason (pure or practical) as unhelpful or worse in telling us what we ought to do. Pragmatism and consequential analysis of default rules, if anything, dominate the discussion. But the present-day contract rationalists fare no better, seeking to make constitutive claims of knowledge on the basis of reason. The deontological concept of contract as promise may well tell us how we ought to order our private relationships, but it does not really explain why the law is as it is.

There is irony in the overwhelming interest of the consequentialist legal academy in trying to find a scientific answer to our most fundamental questions of duty and deontologists to defend morality consequentially. I argue that there are limits to each and that we operate consequentially and deontologically in the ordering of our private affairs, often simultaneously. The mistakes (typical of reason's drive to a single maximand) are assuming, on one hand, that contractual consequentialism defines our commercial relationships, or, on the other, that contracts are capable of containing our moral obligations. Put another way, there is nothing moral about the contract (versus the underlying promise), and the conflation of the two is the source of the confusion over the limits of the law of contract. The moral or transcendental aspect of the contract is the underlying promise - its soul, so to speak - but the law can only doctor its body, what shows in the contract.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 28

Keywords: Deonotology, consequentialism, contract, promise, Kant, reason

JEL Classification: K10, K12

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 10, 2005  

Suggested Citation

Lipshaw, Jeffrey M., Duty and Consequence: A Non-Conflating Theory of Promise and Contract. Cumberland Law Review, Vol. 36, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=664611

Contact Information

Jeffrey M. Lipshaw (Contact Author)
Suffolk University Law School ( email )
120 Tremont Street
Boston, MA 02108-4977
United States
HOME PAGE: http://ssrn.com/author=381790

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 2,629
Downloads: 269
Download Rank: 64,977
Footnotes:  74

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo4 in 0.516 seconds