Abstract
The continuum fallacy is committed when a proposition is rejected on the basis that one of the concepts which forms part of that proposition cannot be precisely separated into distinct categories. A more graphic (and entertaining) version of the same idea is termed commonly the ‘fallacy of the beard’. That fallacy provides that one cannot deny the existence of the category ‘beard’ because it is impossible precisely to define the point on a continuum at which a man has enough hairs on his chin to be distinguished from a man without enough hairs. The ‘fluid distinction’ between implying a contract term in fact and the interpretation of express terms carries with it a similar logical problem. This is because there is ‘no infallible logical criterion [that] separates the two processes’. Indeed, it is well observed both judicially and extra-judicially that the distinction between implication and interpretation cannot be located with precision. Does this lack of precision mean that the distinction is unsound? We think not.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 17-22 |
Number of pages | 6 |
Journal | Journal of Contract Law |
Volume | 39 |
Issue number | 1 |
Publication status | Published - 7 Dec 2023 |