Before we can talk about conscious or unconscious agreements, we need to nail down what an agreement actually is — and just as importantly, what it isn't.
"I didn't sign anything!" — Every person who later discovered they were in an agreement
The Simple Version
An agreement is a meeting of minds — two or more parties coming together with mutual understanding and mutual consent on specific terms.
Sounds basic, right? But here's where it gets interesting:
You can't have an agreement with yourself... wait. Actually, you CAN make agreements with yourself. But one entity can't impose an "agreement" on another unilaterally. That's not agreement — that's command.
If you don't understand the terms — really understand them, with correct definitions — is there truly a meeting of minds? Hidden meanings undermine the whole thing.
Yes! Every New Year's resolution is an agreement with yourself. Every commitment you make to yourself — "I'll exercise more," "I'll stop doing X" — is a self-agreement. And every time you break one, you weaken trust with the most important person: you. This matters more than you might think.
The Legal Definition
Notice the key elements hiding in that definition:
- Understanding — both parties comprehend
- Intention — both parties mean to agree
- Two or more parties — can't be imposed unilaterally
- Rights and duties — something changes for everyone
If any of these are missing, you don't really have an agreement. You might have a misunderstanding, a deception, or a command — but not an agreement.
Agreement vs. Command
This is the big one. A command flows one direction: authority issues an instruction, subjects comply. No negotiation, no consent, no meeting of minds.
Much of "law" looks like command: "You must do X. Failure results in penalty Y."
But here's the question that changes everything: Where does the authority to command come from?
In most legal systems, the authority to command traces back to some form of prior agreement. The Constitution? An agreement. Citizenship? Implies agreement. Residence? Implies agreement. Jurisdiction? Requires agreement (or at least the appearance of it). The whole command structure stands on agreements — often ones you didn't consciously make.
This doesn't mean commands have no force. It means their force traces back to agreements. And agreements, unlike gravity, can be examined, questioned, and sometimes exited.
The Five Essential Elements
For an agreement to be valid and enforceable, five things must be present:
1. Offer and Acceptance
One party proposes terms. Another party accepts them. Without clear offer and clear acceptance, there's no agreement — just assumptions floating in the air.
Think about that mortgage you signed. Was there a clear offer? Did you understand exactly what you were accepting? Or did you sign where they pointed while someone rushed you through?
2. Mutual Assent (Meeting of the Minds)
Both parties must genuinely understand and intend to enter the agreement. This is the "meeting of minds" part.
Here's where it gets tricky: if you thought "person" meant "human being" but the legal definition includes corporations... was there really a meeting of minds?
3. Consideration
This is the big one. Both sides must exchange something of value.
Without valid consideration — mutual exchange of value — a contract is generally void. One-sided "agreements" where only one party gives and only one party receives aren't valid contracts. They might be gifts, donations, or involuntary servitude — but not enforceable contracts. Remember this. We'll come back to it.
4. Lawful Purpose
The agreement must be for something that isn't inherently unlawful. You can't have an enforceable contract to commit a crime. (Though people try.)
5. Capacity
Parties must have the legal and mental capacity to enter agreements. Contracts with minors or people under duress are often voidable for this reason.
The Two Flavors: Express and Implied
Here's where most people get caught:
Terms stated explicitly — in writing or verbally. You sign a contract, shake hands on a deal, say "I do." Clear offer, clear acceptance, clear terms. You know you're agreeing.
Terms understood from behavior, circumstances, or custom. Order food at a restaurant? Implied agreement to pay. Park in a lot? Implied acceptance of posted terms. Exist within certain boundaries? Implied agreement to... what exactly?
Implied agreements are where most unconscious agreements live. Behaviors you didn't know meant "yes." Terms you didn't know applied. Status you didn't know you'd claimed by simply being born somewhere or filling out a form.
When you got your driver's license, you probably thought you were just getting permission to drive. But you may have also "agreed" to implied consent for breath tests, to be subject to certain jurisdictions, to identify yourself on demand. Did anyone explain all that? Did you understand you were agreeing to more than just "can drive"?
The Framework for Everything
Understanding what an agreement actually is gives you a universal framework for examining any claim of obligation:
- Was there an offer I actually accepted?
- Did I understand the terms (with correct definitions)?
- Was there valid consideration both ways?
- Did I have capacity and freedom from duress?
- Was my consent truly informed?
These questions apply to contracts, statutes, regulations, and any other claim that you "agreed" to something. The framework is universal; the applications are specific.