Author Archives: F. E. Guerra-Pujol

In my previous post, I explained why Ronald Coase’s reciprocal-harm insight should be treated as an axiom, i.e. an indemonstrable first principle or formal logical expression used in a deduction to yield further results. Today (Merry Christmas!), I will explore … Continue reading →

Feliz Nochebuena; Happy Christmas Eve! As readers of this blog may know, I have long been fascinated with Ronald Coase’s counter-intuitive insight that harms are a “reciprocal” problem. What you may not know, however, is that this simple idea has … Continue reading →

I mentioned in a previous post that my latest work-in-progress “Coase’s fable” is a follow-up to two previous papers I wrote, one titled “Coase’s parable”; the other, “Modelling the Coase Theorem.” Now, as a follow-up to my follow-up (!), I … Continue reading →

That is the title of the paper, available here via SSRN, that I will be presenting this weekend at the Winter Institute for the History and Philosophy of Economics at the University of Austin (UATX). My paper is an updated … Continue reading →

This weekend, I will be attending and presenting my work on Ronald Coase, who is considered the founder of “law & economics,” at the Winter Institute for the History and Philosophy of Economics at the University of Austin (UATX), a … Continue reading →

How do our Anglo-American common law principles inform social contract theory? Would any of the three fictional social contracts of Hobbes, Locke, or Rousseau, for example, be enforceable from a purely legal perspective? Recall from my previous post the four … Continue reading →

Is the so-called “social contract” of social contract theory a valid or legally-enforceable agreement? At common law, the four key elements of a contract are as follows: What happens when we apply these four common law elements of contract law to … Continue reading →

This past weekend I concluded my series on the paradox of politics, which I began in October of this year. Among the many political theorists we surveyed were Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacque Rousseau, all of whom are deservedly … Continue reading →