Use and the Function of Property

Q2 Social Sciences American Journal of Jurisprudence Pub Date : 2018-08-27 DOI:10.2139/SSRN.2406052
Eric R. Claeys
{"title":"Use and the Function of Property","authors":"Eric R. Claeys","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2406052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Many scholars assume that property concepts contribute very little to the way in which people think about rights in resources. Yet these assumed views do not accord with what we know about clocks, keys, fiat currency, and other artifacts. Artifacts are intention-dependent objects. The distinct ways in which different artifacts satisfy those intentions—their artifact functions—give artifacts more structure and coherence than is commonly believed. \nThose lessons come from scholarship on the philosophy of artifacts, and this Article uses them to study property concepts. This Article studies three concepts of property prominent in Anglo-American property law. All three concepts perform a common artifact function, facilitating the beneficial use of ownable resources. In the concepts and this function, “use” refers to an interest people have in deploying resources for rational well-being and consistent with others’ correlative use-interests. This Article supplies accounts of the intensions for the three concepts introduced. The Article also shows that these concepts extend coherently to property doctrines that are believed to confound encompassing concepts of property—easements, licenses, covenants running with the land, and the interests that beneficiaries hold in wealth-management trusts fall within the extensions for the appropriate concepts.","PeriodicalId":39920,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Jurisprudence","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Jurisprudence","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2406052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Many scholars assume that property concepts contribute very little to the way in which people think about rights in resources. Yet these assumed views do not accord with what we know about clocks, keys, fiat currency, and other artifacts. Artifacts are intention-dependent objects. The distinct ways in which different artifacts satisfy those intentions—their artifact functions—give artifacts more structure and coherence than is commonly believed. Those lessons come from scholarship on the philosophy of artifacts, and this Article uses them to study property concepts. This Article studies three concepts of property prominent in Anglo-American property law. All three concepts perform a common artifact function, facilitating the beneficial use of ownable resources. In the concepts and this function, “use” refers to an interest people have in deploying resources for rational well-being and consistent with others’ correlative use-interests. This Article supplies accounts of the intensions for the three concepts introduced. The Article also shows that these concepts extend coherently to property doctrines that are believed to confound encompassing concepts of property—easements, licenses, covenants running with the land, and the interests that beneficiaries hold in wealth-management trusts fall within the extensions for the appropriate concepts.
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
财产的使用与功能
许多学者认为,财产概念对人们思考资源权利的方式贡献甚微。然而,这些假设的观点与我们对时钟、钥匙、法定货币和其他人工制品的了解并不一致。人工制品是与意图相关的物体。不同的工件满足这些意图的不同方式——它们的工件功能——赋予了工件比通常认为的更多的结构和连贯性。这些经验来自于对文物哲学的研究,本文将其用于研究财产概念。本文研究了英美财产法中突出的三个财产概念。这三个概念都执行一个共同的工件功能,促进了对可拥有资源的有益使用。在概念和功能中,“使用”是指人们为了合理的幸福而部署资源的兴趣,并与他人的相关使用兴趣相一致。这篇文章介绍了所介绍的三个概念的内涵。该文章还表明,这些概念一致地延伸到财产学说,这些学说被认为混淆了包括财产的概念——地役权、许可证、与土地相关的契约,以及受益人在财富管理信托中持有的利益,都属于适当概念的延伸范围。
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
American Journal of Jurisprudence
American Journal of Jurisprudence Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
期刊最新文献
Practical Reason and Private Law: Some Sketches Specifying Interpersonal Responsibilities in Private Law: Property Perspectives Public-Private Drift and the Shattering Polity NDAs: A Study in Rights, Wrongs, and Civil Recourse Poverty and Private Law: Beyond Distributive Justice
×
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:481959085
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