ABSTRACT
Braybrooke David acknowledges the truth of some of the things that Lloyd Bonfield, Richard Miller, and Ronald Aminzade have had to say, but argues that these things only bring forward matters that operate in the history of changes of rules in addition to considerations of logic. Aminzade makes the point that people often carry on in spite of confusion, contriving to live somehow with blatant contradictions. The rule might emerge first as a maxim of prudence. Pressing the rule upon employers could make sense even under a regime of private property. Miller does riot direct his challenge against claims that the logic may make attention to rules more precise and with the precision raise new questions about the relations between rules. He questions the importance of rules in causing social change. In becoming a standard for reasonable behavior the maxim has become a full-fledged social rule prohibiting merely irritating measures.
