La Possibilité D'Une Contre-Théorie Du Contrat (The Possibility of a Counter-Theory of Contract)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: En droit civil, les juristes ont l’habitude de recourir a ce qu’on appelle une « theorie generale du contrat ». Celle-ci constitue un systeme de droit des contrats fonde sur la question « qu’est-ce qu’un contrat » mise en harmonie avec le droit positif tel que la dogmatique juridique en rend compte. Etrangement, une telle theorie est tout a la fois interpretative et normative : elle propose une description rationalisee du droit des contrats et elle oblige simultanement a privilegier certaines solutions. Correlativement, cette theorie tend a discrediter a priori les solutions alternatives. Elle exerce un monopole sur la maniere de penser le droit des contrats. Cet article questionne la possibilite d’une contre theorie du contrat. Une contre-theorie est un discours critique qui a pour objet de contrebalancer la theorie generale. Il ne s’agit pas de la reconstituer ou de la supprimer. Mais de fournir des arguments juridiques possedant la meme legitimite theorique que ceux puises a la theorie generale du contrat. English Abstract: In civil law, jurists are used to work with a so-called theory of This is a legal theory which aims to provide a conceptual system of contract law, roited in the question what is a contract?, and elaborated in harmony with the positive as legal dogmatics recognize it. This theory is strangely interpretive and normative at the same time: it offers a rationalized description of contract law and it forces to favour certain types of legal solutions before anything else. As a corollary, this theory tends to discredit a priori alternative solutions. Finally, a general theory of contract has a monopoly on the way that jurists think about contract law. This article rquestions the possibility of a counter theory of contract, that is a critical discourse aiming to counterbalance the power of general theory of contract. It is not a matter of reviewing or removing general theory but a matter of providing alternative legal arguments that can be theoretically grounded as seriously as those of the general theory.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".