Cadê a galera da pós em tradução? ;) Greetings from Brazil! I'm attending a postgraduate program in applied translation and this class was a recomendation from the professor. Thanks!

@edivaldodeoliveira395

2 жыл бұрын

Here we are. Greetings from Pará.

Greetings from Russia. Grateful for the lecture; we have been studying the corporate law for a long time and have watched this video several times. Thank you so much.

Great overview of the course. Thanks for sharing, Professor.

Thank you❤

Hi Seth, thank you for the video. Was the video released encompass one class or does it encompass a summary of the entire course at the end of the year?

@BizLaw

5 жыл бұрын

Adam, this summary reviewed the entire course at the end of the year. I have other videos of individual classes that get into more detail, but I hope this provides a good overview. Thanks for your question!

How does the theory of corporations stand in relation to Natural Law?

@BizLaw

4 жыл бұрын

Great question - and I think one that has not been satisfactorily answered yet. While I can’t resolve the issue here, I’ll approach this in three parts. First, what is natural law? Second, what would be a “natural law of corporations?” And, third, does such natural law exist? First, natural law theory states that legal rules exist independently of any given legal system. Natural laws come from, well, nature, and humans merely discover them. But how to tell whether a man-made law is such a discovery? Proponents of natural law will point to convergences, where many separate legal traditions co-evolved the same law. Second, what could be a natural law of corporations? This would mean that certain legal rules seem to be the same regardless of in what jurisdiction or time period you look. The exercise would be to look are core rules and see whether you find them everywhere. For example, “corporations must maximize shareholder value,” “directors owe a duty of loyalty to the corporation they serve,” or “shareholders rights to control the corporation are limited to electing directors and approving fundamental transactions.” Third, is there a natural law of corporations? Some have argued "there is no natural law of natural law of corporations, for example, that shareholder value maximization is the only permissible goal of management. This mantra is merely a prescription recommended by some economic theories of the firm. Eric W. Oats, Business Persons: A Legal Theory of the Firm (2013). But this argument seems to ignore key facts, namely, firms were ordered to maximize shareholder value in America at least by 1919, see Dodge v. Ford, which predates these economic recommendations. Moreover, we can go much further back, and across the ocean, to find the British East India Company (1600-1874) was chartered to maximize profits for the Crown and the shareholders. See Binda Preet Sahni, A Legal Analysis of the British East India Company, 54 Acta Juridica Hungarica 317-330 (2013). More research regarding the connection between the nature of the firm and natural law should be explored, especially with regard to Coase’s “theory of the firm” and “problem of social cost.”

@josephsmyth832

4 жыл бұрын

Seth Oranburg I greatly appreciate the time that you took to respond to my question regarding natural law. There is a difference between a corporeal body and a corporate body. One is based on concept and theory and the other resides in Natural Law. My understanding is that what makes natural law different is the use of objective logic that leads to hard facts that then create objective truth and only a corporeal body with a natural person can do that. Now my understanding is corporations exist under positive law which is subordinate to natural law. A legal person is of course different from a natural person because a legal person doesn’t have free will. Of course a person means persona; mask. One is of fiction and exists on black ink on white paper and the other belongs to the corporeal body. From my own reading and understanding, when we are talking about regulating and using the corporate body it’s based on cybernetics. There are some great resources if you haven’t found them yet written by MIT regarding this topic. Some Natural Law philosophers have questioned the existence of corporations and its use in nature. I also have learned that unlike a man who has natural rights the legal person under a corporation has privileges. The corporate body also has a tendency to cause self inflicted harm and one of the words that I have seen related to corporations is “suicide”. The question of whether a group person actually exists has been brought up. I am also aware of the 7 liberal arts and sciences known as the Trivium and Quadrivium pertaining to mind and matter. The corporate body itself lacks common sense in relation to space and time

@josephsmyth832

4 жыл бұрын

Seth Oranburg I also forget to mention the social sciences including the Hegelian Dialectic. A person lacks objective logic and only uses bias and prejudice as it’s the subject and not the object. Under administrative law, if one uses bias and prejudice it disqualifies them and lose legal immunity. I am testing this out with the “employer”

@BizLaw

4 жыл бұрын

@@josephsmyth832 -- to be honest with you, I am more sympathetic to the Existentialist philosophers, who eschewed the Hegelian concept of a dialectic that inevitably leads history from chaos to order. I am not so ready to disclaim the import of human consciousness on the process of history. History exists in the human mind. We are solely responsible for our collective consciousness of the objective. That said, how can humanity be responsible for understanding the objective, while we each are subjective creatures? We only view the world from our own viewpoint. Here I find some comfort in economics. Microeconomic theory, in a nutshell, presupposes that human selfishness on an individual level resolves in truth (e.g., the “true” price) on an aggregate scale. Let me try to apply my feeble Hegelian/Economics understanding to your question. You asked how a person who lacks objective logic and is the “subject” (but not Martin Buber’s I or Thou) can go beyond prejudice. The answer is, he or she cannot. But, in the aggregate, humanity smooths out and goes beyond the individual prejudice through our capacity for collective consciousness and understanding. Therefore, the system as a whole maintains its “immunity” as to liability for the wrong results of any individual case. That said, I am no great philosopher. I only hope my modest attempt at a reply to your deep question is somewhat satisfactory. Keep asking … even if I cannot keep answering! - SCO

@josephsmyth832

4 жыл бұрын

Seth Oranburg Wow! I wasn’t expecting a response frankly and I am truly grateful to have an open dialogue. The question that I have asked the corporate agents that I work with as well as a question that has been asked is how can a group person and individual person exist at the same time? I am aware of some aspects to freemasonry and the use of social sciences. The issue is communism has taken over the education system that is simply based on outcomes using psychological methods linked to BF Skinner. My question is how does it make sense to allow society to degenerate so much just to capitalize on them but also put the financial health of the corporate body at risk. It’s just hard for me to accept that people who work for these companies are basically stuck in their boxes of fear and ignorance and they don’t see the self destructive behaviour that they take part in. I truly desire the divine marriage of the masculine and feminine to not cause harm or loss to any man or woman and realize that my values, morals, ethics, and even law are interconnected to mind and matter based on the Trivium and Quadrivium.

Can you let me reports this video on my channel? Please

@BizLaw

2 жыл бұрын

Absolutely, thanks for your interest.

HAHA! HE SAID DUTY!

@nathancarranza9860

5 жыл бұрын

John James ????

@BizLaw

4 жыл бұрын

Yes. Yes I did.