IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/oplwec/qt5dj8m2kf.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Models of Morality in Law and Economics: Self-Control and Self-Improvement for the "Bad Man" of Holmes

Author

Listed:
  • Cooter, Robert D.

Abstract

Holmes commended scholars to analyze law from the viewpoint of a "bad man." If Holmes had in mind everyday wrongdoing, and not a lofty evil, then he prescribed the research strategy of law and economics. The virtuous prefer good, villains prefer bad, and rational actors in economics prefer themselves. Instead of obeying or disobeying the law for its own sake, the rational actor in economics treats law as an obstacle or an instrument, not a value. The success of the economic analysis of law proves the fruitfulness of this research strategy. Instead of praise, however, this paper offers critique and extension. As the social complexity that law regulates increases, economists typically prescribe decentralization. Decentralized law works best when spontaneous obedience and private enforcement supplement state coercion. Internalized morality prompts spontaneous obedience and perfects private enforcement. Thus minimizing state coercion maximizes reliance upon internalized morality. Developing a theory of morality to anchor decentralized law requires extending models beyond the bad man. This paper develops two fundamental ideas of morality: self-control and self-improvement. I will explain how law harnesses and strengthens self-control, and also how the law changes people by creating opportunities for self-improvement.

Suggested Citation

  • Cooter, Robert D., 1998. "Models of Morality in Law and Economics: Self-Control and Self-Improvement for the "Bad Man" of Holmes," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt5dj8m2kf, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:cdl:oplwec:qt5dj8m2kf
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/5dj8m2kf.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Abhijit Banerjee & Jörgen W. Weibull & Ken Binmore, 1996. "Evolution and Rationality: Some Recent Game-Theoretic Results," International Economic Association Series, in: Beth Allen (ed.), Economics in a Changing World, chapter 4, pages 90-117, Palgrave Macmillan.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mark White, 2010. "Adam Smith and Immanuel Kant: On Markets, Duties, and Moral Sentiments," Forum for Social Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 53-60, January.
    2. Bruno Deffains & Claude Fluet, 2020. "Social Norms and Legal Design," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(1), pages 139-169.
    3. Stringham, Edward Peter, 2011. "Embracing morals in economics: The role of internal moral constraints in a market economy," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 78(1-2), pages 98-109, April.
    4. Brennan, Geoffrey & Brooks, Michael, 2011. "On the ‘cashing out’ hypothesis and ‘soft’ and ‘hard’ policies," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 601-610.
    5. Mark D. White, 2018. "The neglected nuance of Beccaria’s theory of punishment," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 315-329, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Banerjee, Abhijit & Weibull, Jörgen W., 1993. "Evolutionary Selection with Discriminating Players," Working Paper Series 375, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    2. Cooter, Robert D., 1999. "Punitive Damages, Social Norms, and Economic Analysis," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt7h38w307, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    3. Weibull, Jörgen W., 1993. "The 'As if' Approach to Game Theory: 3 Positive Results and 4 Obstacles," Working Paper Series 392, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:oplwec:qt5dj8m2kf. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/lebrkus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.