Re: Law as algebra
fbonsignore_at_beethoven.com
Date: 03/14/05
- Next message: invalid_at_example.com: "Re: Questions about Community Currency."
- Previous message: myal: "Re: Bill would deny U.S. citizenship to children of illegal aliens! HOORAY!"
- In reply to: fbonsignore_at_beethoven.com: "Law as algebra"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 13 Mar 2005 19:03:51 -0800
fbonsignore@beethoven.com wrote:
> Ultimately the essence of law is to act as an algebraic operation,
> linking the set of all human acts to the set composed of two values,
> not guilty and guilty, set which can then be further expanded by
> including no contest in some cases, and compensations and punishments
> as expansions of the values not guilty and guilty. The space on
whichh
> this operation is defined, however abstract,
> is the set of all judgements of value or simply values.
>
> Since this domain is uncountable infinite, the function of judges is,
> following the metaphor, to act as closures, to turn acts through laws
> into value values (inevitable pun). By applying this conception to
the
> extreme any law system can be formalized and computed, leaving to
> humans, the most exquisite computers yet, to perform the closures. Of
> course, the need to classify and categorize what is by definition a
> fuzzy domain, that of acts, prevents us from truly formalizing and
> applying mechanically this view, particularly since circumstances are
> an important element in the definition of acts. This may point to a
> critic to current law systems from the notion that acts, or criminal
> acts, are more or less well defined or granulated. Ideally, an act
> would be named and several subacts attached to the definition before
> linking it to punishments and compensations by law, in other words,
> acts (not necessarily *criminal* acts, since criminal is ust a tag
> denoting the link act->punishment), can be seen as a cross product of
> elementary acts where every possible circumstance is crossed to
arrive
> in the extreme to the most detailed description of acts, before
> submitting them to the `law computer`, to yield irom the input the
> output of punishments and compensations.
>
> Law systems can then be seen as the set of transformations between
acts
> and punishments (compensation would be negative punishments) from the
> infinite set of all possible relations of acts to punishments. From
> this it is implied that law systems can be more or less complete in
> several senses, the more complete the more difficult to apply in real
> life. It also points to the (im)possibility of `criticizing` a law
> system by minimizing social costs or benefits of the application of a
> particular law set by calculating for given domain and codomain sets
> the expected value of punishments. In other words, several aspect of
a
> law system can in abstract be investigated formally to achieve optima
> in a sort of equation solving to meet social criteria.
>
> For instance, given a well defined set of acts, probabilistic
> distributions of their occurrence, plus estimations of the social
cost
> (result) of those acts, the set of punishments and their cost
> (considering opportunity costs), several law systems (judging
> operation) can be tested to find which of them maximizes or minimizes
> social value or other variables. This may even be done automatically
by
> a search algorithm which would perform a search in the set of
possible
> rules to attach acts to punishments in a (sub)optimal way. Agenetic
> algorith with suitable semantics would be adequate. (If this terminal
> is being hacked, while I finish writing what I write may have been
> published elsewhere.... internet is terra incognita)
>
> Fabrizio J Bonsignore, now Danilo J Bonsignore
This approach turns law decision making and evaluation into an
inherently computable problem and links law making to the specification
of families of welfare functions to act as evaluators. Given gals as
welfare functioe maximized and sets of acts affecting the output of
those functions, as well as sets of punishments derived from the
application of the laws as inputs for the same functions, a search
algorithm would develop the `best` set of rules to maximize such
function (or family of functios, though in practice it would be
necessary to completely specify even if partially a particular
function).
Yet in practical situations the application of the judging operation
will be as good as the truth values of the input and the categorization
of the acts which feed the operation. The appropriate semantics depends
on the particular implementation of the model and its maximization
algorithm, though in practice a rule approach would be adequate. It
would then be possible to use a genetic algorith and a welfare/output
model as a framework to develop expert systems. This can be very useful
in limited environments or domains, particularly since the rules must
`make sense`, that is, there will be minimum sets of constraints that
need be satisfied and may or may not be included implicitly in the
welfare/output model (or simulation) that leads the search algorithm.
Fabrizio J Bonsignore, now Danilo J Bonsignore
- Next message: invalid_at_example.com: "Re: Questions about Community Currency."
- Previous message: myal: "Re: Bill would deny U.S. citizenship to children of illegal aliens! HOORAY!"
- In reply to: fbonsignore_at_beethoven.com: "Law as algebra"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
