From Sovereignty to International Cooperation: Lessons from Legal Logic and Social Ontology

This paper connects State sovereignty to fragmentation and the potential for inconsistencies conflicts, investigating whether exercises of necessarily lead that would hinder international cooperation. It argues this is not case, essentially because logic rules differs fundamentally from statements, rule allows one find a consistent workable legal system in pluralistic fragmented collection sources law. The begins by showing how leads law, inconsistency, increasing risk conflicts. Thereafter, it pays attention traditional conception consistency considering descriptive sentences. However, holds sentences does fit nature rules. While descriptions are true or false as far they succeed at describing world, truth-apt. Rules valid invalid extent influencing world. difference adopt different definition Following this, considers adding more can remove inconsistency concludes addition help ensure set Moreover, even if result ‘unsupervised’ States has occurred, further rule-creation conflict means framework meta-rules.