[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Why most classifications are fuzzy

To: "[ontolog-forum]" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Anders Tell <opensource@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 12:36:09 +0200
Message-id: <34BD45FE-78B6-456E-BDF3-D08E880B9D2E@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Jul 7, 2011, at 10:40 PM, doug foxvog wrote:

A contract, book, poem, or law maintains its existence whether or
not written forms of them are maintained or destroyed.  So yes, the piece
of paper or electronic record can be called a "contract" -- but those
contracts are not the agreements to which people are bound; they are
documentary evidence of the existence of agreements.

In a way yes. 

A slightly different view from Estrella work.

"A contract bears one or more norms, all of which are uttered by some natural person or legal person. It cannot bear expressions which are uttered by a different kind of agent."

A contract is legal document

"A legal document is a document bearing norms or normative statements. By virtue of this definition the norm-as-propositional-attitude is reified as norm-as proposition. In other words, the norm being expressed through the legal source is an _expression_ of the propositional attitude.ument."

A legal document is legal source

"A legal source is a source for legal statements, both norms and legal expressions. In a sense it is literally a 'source' of law"

Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>