[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RFC: General resolution: Clarify the status of the social contract

On Fri, Dec 19, 2008 at 05:08:57PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>         The social contract is supposedly a contract.

The Social Contract is not a contract (even though it is called that - but I
believe the name is an intentional reference to a famous concept in political
philosophy).  A contract needs at least two parties that exchange promises.
The SC has only one party (well, two if you want to stretch it), and is an
unilateral promise with no expectation of a return promise.

What the SC is, is a pledge.

The terminology doesn't really matter, except that I will be voting against any
proposal that calls the SC a contract, even if the sense of the proposal is
something I support.

Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho, Jyväskylä, Finland

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: