Abstract
Using a jurisprudence grounded in pragmatist philosophy, this chapter proposes a reconceiving of the concept of legal fictions. By tradition, fictions are treated in legal theory as consciously false assertions. This is unfortunate, for it engulfs law in logical contradiction, marginalizes all fictions as metaphysically suspect regardless of social value, and compromises the integrity of law and judicial decision-making. I argue instead that legal fictions be understood as propositional legal truths—doctrines, rules, principles—asserted in conscious recognition that they are inconsistent in meaning or otherwise in semantic conflict with true propositional claims made outside (or elsewhere within) the law. If the conflict produces no damage outside law or within—i.e. no confusion, incoherence, or functional destabilization—and if the fiction works some efficiency or functional improvement within the system of law, then the fiction has value and utility. But to the extent a legal fiction wreaks intersystemic havoc—generates confusion or incoherence, frustrates ability to function—or does not work some genuine utility within law, it is not useful, but problematic. Harmless and workable legal fictions hold pragmatic value and are law-worthy, while problematic, pernicious fictions should be removed from the law.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
What shall we call a thing anyhow? It seems quite arbitrary, for we carve out everything, just as we carve out constellations, to suit our human purposes–
William James, Pragmatism [122]
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Bentham, Jeremy. 1843. Works. Edinburgh: William Tait.
Bentham, Jeremy. 1977. A fragment on government. In A comment on the commentaries and a fragment on government, eds. J. H. Burns and H. L. A. Hart. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Blackstone, William. [1765–1769] 1979. Commentaries on the laws of England. 4 vols. Chicago: University Chicago Press.
Brandom, Robert B. 2011. Perspectives on pragmatism: Classical, recent, and contemporary. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Camden, Jen, and Kathryn E. Fort. 2008. ‘Channeling Thought’—The legacy of legal fictions from 1823. American Indian Law Review 33:77–109.
Campbell, Kenneth. 1983. Fuller on legal fictions. Law & Philosophy 2:339–370.
Cardozo, Benjamin. 1921. The nature of the judicial process. Yale: Yale University Press.
Del Mar, Maksymilian. 2014. Legal fictions and legal change in the common law tradition. In Legal fictions in theory and practice, ed. Maksymilian Del Mar and William Twining. Dordrecht: Springer.
Devlin, Patrick. 1979. The judge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Dewey, John. [1916] 1954. Essays in experimental logic. New York: Dover Publications.
Dewey, John. 1926. Corporate personality. Yale Law Journal 35:655–673.
Dewey, John. [1929] 1984. The quest for certainty. In The later works 1925–1953, ed. Jo Ann Boydston. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Dewey, John. 2012. Unmodern philosophy and modern philosophy. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
Frank, Jerome. 1936. Law and the modern mind. New York: Tudor Publishing Co.
Fuller, Lon L. 1967. Legal fictions. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Gray, John Chipman. 1909. The nature and sources of the law. New York: Columbia University Press.
Gregory, Charles Noble. 1911. The doctrine of continuous voyage. Harvard Law Review 24:167–181.
Harmon, Louise. 1990. Falling off the vine: Legal fictions and the doctrine of substituted judgment. Yale Law Journal 100:1–71.
Hart, H. L. A. 1982a. Bentham and Beccaria. In Essays on bentham: Studies in jurisprudence and political theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Hart, H. L. A. 1982b. Legal Duty and Obligation. In Essays on bentham: Studies in jurisprudence and political theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Hart, Danielle Kie. 2011. Contract law now—Reality meets legal fictions. Baltimore Law Review 41:1–81.
Hogue, Arthur R. [1966] 1985. Origins of the common law. Indianapolis: Liberty Press.
Holmes, Oliver Wendell Jr. [1881] 1938. The common law. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
James, William. [1907] 1975. Pragmatism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
James, William. [1909a] 1975. The meaning of truth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
James, William. [1909b] 1996. A pluralistic universe. Lincoln: University Nebraska Press.
James, William. [1911] 1996. Some problems of philosophy. Lincoln: University Nebraska Press.
James, William. [1912] 1996. Essays in radical empiricism. Lincoln: University Nebraska Press.
Jhering, Rudolf von. 1913. Law as a means to an end (Trans.: Isaac Husik). Boston: Boston Book Co.
Jhering, Rudolf von. 1924. Geist des römischen Rechts auf den verschiedenen Stufen seiner Entwicklung. 6th ed. Leipzig: Breitkopf and Hartel.
Johnson v. M’Intosh. 1823. 21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) 543 (1923).
Knauer, Nancy. 2010. Legal fictions and juristic truth. St. Thomas Law Review 23:1–49.
Lidz, C. W., P. S. Appelbaum, and A. Meisel. 1988. Two models of implementing informed consent. Archives of Internal Medicine 148:1385–1389.
Lind, Douglas. 2010. Pragmatism and anthropomorphism: Reconceiving the doctrine of the personality of the ship. University of San Francisco Maritime Law Journal 22:39–121.
Locke, Alain. 1989. Value. In The philosophy of Alain Locke: Harlem renaissance and beyond, ed. Leonard Harris. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Mabo v Queensland [1992] HCA 23; (1992) 175 CLR 1
Maine, Sir Henry Sumner. [1861] 1986. Ancient law. New York: Dorset Press.
Mitchell, Oliver R. 1893. The fictions of the law: Have they proved useful or detrimental to its growth? Harvard Law Review 7:249–265.
Mostyn v. Fabrigas 1 Cowp. 161, 98 Eng. Rep. 1021 (K.B. 1774) (Mansfield, L.J.)
Nix v. Hedden 149 U.S. 304 (1893)
Patterson, Edwin W. 1953. Jurisprudence: Men and ideas of the law. Brooklyn: Foundation Press.
Plato. 1995. Phaedrus (Trans.: Alexander Nehamas and Paul Woodruff). Indianapolis: Hackett.
Pollock, Sir Frederick, and Frederic William Maitland. 1959. The history of english law. 2nd ed., 2 vols. Washington, D.C.: Lawyers’ Literary Club.
Pound, Roscoe. 1932. Interpretations of legal history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Pound, Roscoe. 1959. Jurisprudence. St. Paul, Minn.: West Pub. Co.
Prebble, John. 2002. Income taxation: A structure built on sand. Sydney Law Review 24:301–318.
Prebble, John. 2011. Fictions of income tax. Victoria University of Wellington Legal Research Paper No. 29/2011. http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1604978. Accessed 16 Dec 2013.
Putnam, Hilary. 1981. Reason, truth and history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Putnam, Hilary. 1995. Pragmatism: An open question. Oxford: Blackwell.
Quine, Willard van Orman. 1953. Two dogmas of empiricism. In From a logical point of view, 20–46. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Richard Barton Enterprises, Inc. v. Tsern. 1996. 928 P.2d 368 (Utah 1996).
Ross, Alf. 1969. Legal fictions. In Law, reason, and justice: Essays in legal philosophy, ed. Graham Hughes, 217–234. New York: New York University Press.
Savigny, Frederick Charles von. 1831. Of the vocation of our age for legislation and jurisprudence (Trans.: Abraham Hayward). London: Littlewood.
Schane, Sanford A. 1987. The corporation is a person: The language of a legal fiction. Tulane Law Review 61:563–609.
Schauer, Frederick. 2014. Legal fictions revisited. In Legal fictions in theory and practice, ed. Maksymilian Del Mar and William Twining. Dordrecht: Springer.
Schiller, F. C. S. 1903. Humanism: Philosophical essays. London: Macmillan.
Smith, Jeremiah. 1917. Surviving fictions. Yale Law Journal 27:147–166.
Smith, Peter J. 2007. New legal fictions. Georgetown Law Journal 95:1435–1495.
Soifer, Aviam. 1986. Reviewing legal fictions. Georgia Law Review 20:871–915.
The John G. Stevens 170 U.S. 113 (1898)
The William 5 C. Robinson, 385 (1806)
Tourtoulon, Pierre de. 1922. Philosophy in the development of law (Trans.: Martha McC. Read). New York: Macmillan.
Tucker v. Alexandroff 183 U.S. 424 (1902) United States v. Brig Malek Adhel 43 U.S. (2 How.) 210 (1844)
United States v. The Little Charles 26 F.Cas. 979 (C.C. Va. 1818) (No. 15,612)
United States v. Brig Malek Adhel 43 U.S. (2 How.) 210 (1844)
Vaihinger, Hans. [1924] 1984. The philosophy of ‘As If’: A system of the theoretical, practical and religious fictions of mankind (Trans.: C. K. Ogden). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Vitoria, Francisco de. [1539] 1991. On the American Indians. In Political writings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1966. Lectures on religious belief I. In Lectures and conversations on aesthetics, psychology and religious belief, ed. Cyril Barrett. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1975. Philosophical remarks, ed. Rush Rhees (Trans.: Raymond Hargreaves and Roger white). Chicago: University Chicago Press.
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1978. Philosophical grammar, ed. Rush Rhees (Trans.: Anthony Kenny). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lind, D. (2015). The Pragmatic Value of Legal Fictions. In: Del Mar, M., Twining, W. (eds) Legal Fictions in Theory and Practice. Law and Philosophy Library, vol 110. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09232-4_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-09232-4_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-09231-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-09232-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)