The only agency relationships that the courts should recognize are those created by agreement. Agency relationships are like contracts. There must be a meeting of the minds in order for a contract to...

The only agency relationships that the courts should recognize are those created by agreement. Agency relationships are like contracts. There must be a meeting of the minds in order for a contract to be valid, and this standard ought also to apply to agency relationships. Agency relationships created by implied authority, ratification, or estoppel all originate with either anambiguous agreement or a false statement. In the first instance, the ambiguity surrounding the agreement prevents both parties from knowing if there has been a meeting of the minds. This situation may be likened to two people who speak different languages negotiating a contract. Each will never know if the other is willing to grant his or her desires. The second scenario violates a notion that civilized human beings hold very dear: that we should tell the truth. By allowing agency relationships that began with one party’s telling a lie, we encourage dishonesty. People are motivated to lie about their agency relationships out of hope that the other party will accept the lie. It’s the same as telling all of your friends that you are engaged to someone in order to pressure that person into accepting your proposal for marriage. Finally, by allowing such relationships the opportunity to become legally valid, we are merely opening the door for more lawsuits. Our courts’ dockets are already full; we should work to reduce the court workload, not to increase it. To create a better society, we must treat agency relationships like other contracts. The author of this passage relies heavily on analogies in his reasoning. Locate these analogies and evaluate how reasonable they are. (Remember, the way to evaluate an analogy is to state ways in which the two things being compared are similar, and then to state ways in which they are different.

1. What is the author’s conclusion, and with what reasons does he support it?

2. Is there any additional information that would aid you in your task of evaluating this argument?

3. State an argument that is the opposite of the one set out by the author here.