Legal Regulation, Technological Management and the Future of Human Agency.

IF 1 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Oxford Journal of Legal Studies Pub Date : 2024-10-25 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1093/ojls/gqae035
William Lucy
{"title":"Legal Regulation, Technological Management and the Future of Human Agency.","authors":"William Lucy","doi":"10.1093/ojls/gqae035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article examines the role of human agency within two competing regulatory paradigms: law and technological management. It sketches both paradigms and suggests that the direction of regulatory travel in familiar jurisdictions is from the former towards the latter. It then examines the possible effect of this transition upon human agency. It defends a general account of agency, distinguishing that notion from autonomy, and shows that that account informs the legal regulatory paradigm. It then considers whether agency, so conceived, can persist and flourish within a technological management regulatory context. It does so by reference to a thought-experiment. That experiment, and two of three responses to it, assumes that agency can be quantified, and the article shows how this can be done. It concludes that a transition from legal regulation to technological management will reduce the amount of human agency in the world and imperil other important values.</p>","PeriodicalId":47225,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies","volume":"45 1","pages":"55-80"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11928222/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Journal of Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqae035","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines the role of human agency within two competing regulatory paradigms: law and technological management. It sketches both paradigms and suggests that the direction of regulatory travel in familiar jurisdictions is from the former towards the latter. It then examines the possible effect of this transition upon human agency. It defends a general account of agency, distinguishing that notion from autonomy, and shows that that account informs the legal regulatory paradigm. It then considers whether agency, so conceived, can persist and flourish within a technological management regulatory context. It does so by reference to a thought-experiment. That experiment, and two of three responses to it, assumes that agency can be quantified, and the article shows how this can be done. It concludes that a transition from legal regulation to technological management will reduce the amount of human agency in the world and imperil other important values.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
法律规制、技术管理与人类代理的未来。
本文考察了人类代理在两个相互竞争的监管范式中的作用:法律和技术管理。它概述了这两种范式,并表明,在熟悉的司法管辖区,监管旅行的方向是从前者到后者。然后探讨这种转变对人类能动性的可能影响。它为代理的一般解释进行了辩护,将代理的概念与自主的概念区分开来,并表明代理的概念为法律监管范式提供了信息。然后,它考虑这样设想的代理是否可以在技术管理监管的背景下持续存在并蓬勃发展。它通过参考一个思想实验来做到这一点。这个实验,以及对它的三个回应中的两个,假设代理可以被量化,这篇文章展示了如何做到这一点。它的结论是,从法律监管到技术管理的转变将减少世界上人类能动性的数量,并危及其他重要价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
8.30%
发文量
31
期刊介绍: The Oxford Journal of Legal Studies is published on behalf of the Faculty of Law in the University of Oxford. It is designed to encourage interest in all matters relating to law, with an emphasis on matters of theory and on broad issues arising from the relationship of law to other disciplines. No topic of legal interest is excluded from consideration. In addition to traditional questions of legal interest, the following are all within the purview of the journal: comparative and international law, the law of the European Community, legal history and philosophy, and interdisciplinary material in areas of relevance.
期刊最新文献
Is Mental Capacity Law Law? Carefully Tailored: Doctrinal Methods and Empirical Contributions. Correction to: Law, Philosophy and the Susceptible Skins of Living Beings. Protecting Negligence Claimants' Decisions: An Argument of Doctrinal Coherence in Non-pecuniary Loss. A Fundamental Rethinking of Freedom of Speech.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1