Vegan Talk Forums

Arnorld · Vegan Talk Beginner Joined: 20 Jun 2006 Posts: 2

When Holmes states, "if you want to know the law and nothing else, you must look at it as a bad man, who cares only for the material consequences which such knowledge enables him to predict, not as as good one, who finds his reasons for conduct whether inside the law or outside of it, in the vaguer sanctions of conscience"

How does this reasoning lead to the "predictive theory of law"?

What similarities are there between the theory of legal meaning suggested by the predictive theory of law and the more general theory of meaning suggested by Peirce's account of "operational definitions" and associated habits?

What, on Holmes' account, are the two biggest fallacies that people are prone to in thinking about the law?

Any input is appreciated.