>And "code is law" is not really extendable across society. We have contracts, of course. But almost all contracts include a "Use common sense"-style clause, which is the whole point lawyers and judges exist in the first place.
I would characterize the development of law and contracts as something meant to protect parties from common sense. If all we needed was common sense, every contract would just say (a la Raikoth)
>In all situations, the parties will take the normatively correct action.
...and nothing else. Law is essentially shaping common sense into something predictable and useful. So, why wouldn't it be possible to take something deterministic, and shape that into something predictable and useful? It doesn't need to be perfect - it just needs to be better than what already exists.
I would characterize the development of law and contracts as something meant to protect parties from common sense. If all we needed was common sense, every contract would just say (a la Raikoth)
>In all situations, the parties will take the normatively correct action.
...and nothing else. Law is essentially shaping common sense into something predictable and useful. So, why wouldn't it be possible to take something deterministic, and shape that into something predictable and useful? It doesn't need to be perfect - it just needs to be better than what already exists.