> I teach at Santa Clara University in the Law School. This spring I am teaching Economic Analysis of Law, and a seminar on Legal Systems Very Different From Ours.
Nope. Is trying - unsuccessfully, apparently - to point out how arrogant and offending the use of "ours" is in a supposedly scholarly work: I am the byproduct of a so-called "western" culture, yet don't recognize the law system under which my country of origin operates are being covered by this "ours" used in the title.
Arrogant and offending, how? Who is it offending? How is it arrogant?
Arrogant maybe if it said "the best." But it didn't, it said "ours."
Offending maybe if it said "Shit legal systems." But it didn't, it said "Legal systems."
It isn't really reaching to make a few assumptions. On an English speaking website, owned by an American accelerator in California, with a majority of American users, is it hard to assume that "ours" means "American?"
There are (at least) two different kinds of first-person singular: “me and you” and “me and some other people but not you.”
English, unfortunately, does not distinguish between these cases. “Ours” can mean “mine and yours” or it can mean “mine and that of some other people.”
The author clearly means the latter, and you’re getting offended over your own misunderstand.
The Bible, the Old Testament and what the Jews consider Holy Text is the Torah. The Talmud is a body of works of various rabbis; the Talmud mostly the two books of Gemarah and the Mishnah and should not carry the same weight as the Torah. So if one were to consider the Bible (Torah) only, the legal age of an adult appears to be 20. What the Jews did or made up on their own afterwards would be of their own tradition and in some cases in contradiction to the Bible.
The Bible - and Jewish tradition many times do not line up. Even in New Testament times there were issues with this - as Jesus had a beef with the Pharisees because they had all these other laws and rules one had to obey that were not part of the Torah.
Some may find Feliks Koneczny's categorization and analysis[0] of civilizations based on legal system and its relation to ethics, the distinction between private and public law, the distinction between religious and secular law, and so on.
But Anglo-American case law is very different from French or German law. The stated purpose of the Code civil was to do away with traditional French law, and it was indeed a great improvement over the previous state of affairs. This could at least be discussed.
Both arose in Europe, and have been promulgated throughout the world.
These other legal traditions are often highlighted and discussed to show what assumptions the current dominant systems rely upon and what their biases tend to be.
How about a chapter on interesting fictional legal systems? My favorite example is Goachin law where the greatest crime is ignorance of the repercussions of your actions. If you’re found innocent you’re judged unworthy of the responsibilities of sentientience and killed.
To be found guilty you must prove that truly and deeply understand the ramifications of your actions. The guilty go free. The innocent die.
I recently read China Mieville's "The City and The City", which features two countries - each the size of a large city - that cohabitate the same physical space, but are otherwise entirely different legal entities, with national borders.
I don't want to say too much about it, because slowly learning more about this system and society is one of the fun parts of the book, but you can Google for a brief synopsis of how it works.
David Friedman is Milton Friedman's son. He teaches law but has never taken a formal law class. He also likes to study the economic systems of MMORPGs. His son Patri came up with the idea of Seasteading. Interesting character.
And an economics book that actually made sense to me: Hidden Order.
I liked his way of defending free trade. „In America there are two ways to make cars. We build them and we grow them. The people in Detroit use steel and build them. And the people in Iowa put corn and wheat on big ships, sail them eastward, and sone time later they come back with cars.“
People in the USA tend to think that the
country has only one set of laws, but in addition to
49 states with generally similar civil and criminal law,
we also have Louisiana, with a system of law
which descends from the Napoleonic Code, and
arbitration agreements found in many contracts
and ToSes.
In addition, many religious organizations tend
to view their systems of canon law as having primacy
before state or federal law, and educational entities
which take the same view toward their codes of conduct,
preferring to act _in loco parentis_ rather than deferring
to state authorities.
This is not intended to start a political comment on current use of the term "sharia law". But if you research Hanafi Sunni sharia law in its cultural context, the important thing to grok from a western perspective is that the concept of "sin" and "crime" are essentially the same thing. The two concepts used to be generally the same thing, in western european-derived legal systems 250+ years ago, but are now separated in western legal/justice systems.
Peoples' cultural expectation that something which is a sin must therefore also be a crime helps with the understanding of how it's been implemented up until now.
34 comments
[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 41.8 ms ] thread> I teach at Santa Clara University in the Law School. This spring I am teaching Economic Analysis of Law, and a seminar on Legal Systems Very Different From Ours.
Arrogant maybe if it said "the best." But it didn't, it said "ours."
Offending maybe if it said "Shit legal systems." But it didn't, it said "Legal systems."
It isn't really reaching to make a few assumptions. On an English speaking website, owned by an American accelerator in California, with a majority of American users, is it hard to assume that "ours" means "American?"
English, unfortunately, does not distinguish between these cases. “Ours” can mean “mine and yours” or it can mean “mine and that of some other people.”
The author clearly means the latter, and you’re getting offended over your own misunderstand.
The list doesn’t mention either common law or civil law. As different from each other as those are they’re still mutually intelligible.
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Course_Pages/legal_sy...
He says:
"The biblical rules, which set twelve and a half as the age of female adulthood"
The Bible is very clear that a male or female become adults at age 20.
See Exodus 12, 38; Numbers 11,14; 1 Chronicles 31:17, Ezra 3:8 and there are probably some more scriptures that show it.
The Bible, the Old Testament and what the Jews consider Holy Text is the Torah. The Talmud is a body of works of various rabbis; the Talmud mostly the two books of Gemarah and the Mishnah and should not carry the same weight as the Torah. So if one were to consider the Bible (Torah) only, the legal age of an adult appears to be 20. What the Jews did or made up on their own afterwards would be of their own tradition and in some cases in contradiction to the Bible.
The Bible - and Jewish tradition many times do not line up. Even in New Testament times there were issues with this - as Jesus had a beef with the Pharisees because they had all these other laws and rules one had to obey that were not part of the Torah.
[0] https://www.scribd.com/doc/4464979/ON-THE-PLURALITY-OF-CIVIL...
- Common law
- Case law (popular in Anglo countries)
- Civil law (popular in Western European countries)
It refers to common and civil law, the two dominant legal traditions in the world. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law#/media/File:Map_of_...
Both arose in Europe, and have been promulgated throughout the world.
These other legal traditions are often highlighted and discussed to show what assumptions the current dominant systems rely upon and what their biases tend to be.
file page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Map_of_the_Legal_systems_...
direct link: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/92/Map_of_t...
I don't want to say too much about it, because slowly learning more about this system and society is one of the fun parts of the book, but you can Google for a brief synopsis of how it works.
http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Medieval/To_Milk_an_Almond.pdf
I liked his way of defending free trade. „In America there are two ways to make cars. We build them and we grow them. The people in Detroit use steel and build them. And the people in Iowa put corn and wheat on big ships, sail them eastward, and sone time later they come back with cars.“
In addition, many religious organizations tend to view their systems of canon law as having primacy before state or federal law, and educational entities which take the same view toward their codes of conduct, preferring to act _in loco parentis_ rather than deferring to state authorities.
Peoples' cultural expectation that something which is a sin must therefore also be a crime helps with the understanding of how it's been implemented up until now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4gU2Tsv6hY