English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper offers an analysis of an issue related to the social contract theory The issue concerned is disagreement in the form of tacit consent. Namely, if we accept the model of tacit consent, then an issue of costs of this disagreement is raised. These costs cannot be treated in the same way as in the case of express consent. The reason is that, in the case of tacit consent, a person does not have same chances and opportunities as others. This offers a possibility of claiming discrimination, especially if we accept the fact that these costs can be so high so that they deny the possibility of choice. At least in a practical sense and de facto. So, this topic must be understood properly if we want the social contract theory to function well. In this paper, we will try to do that through a logical and semantic analysis of basic terms: tacit consent, disagreement, and costs of contract.

Tacit consent and costs of non-entry into the political community