According to Anderson, man cannot be considered free under his agreement if he is to held to make up debt at the will of another individual. She is addressing the idea of a creditor having the power over the person indebted to them. She mentions that as a result of the banning of practices such as use of debtors prisons and debt peonage, there is more freedom among men in regards to credit. In relation to the furniture case, Williams is subject to the will of the furniture company, and therefor through the terms of the contract she is not free. She explains kinds of freedom that she claims “fundamentally matter.” According to Anderson, a person cannot be considered free unless they are free from all ties to others in which they could be held to the other person’s will (348). Anderson would agree with Williams in her statement claiming that the contract is unconscionable, and therefore disagree with the decision made by the
According to Anderson, man cannot be considered free under his agreement if he is to held to make up debt at the will of another individual. She is addressing the idea of a creditor having the power over the person indebted to them. She mentions that as a result of the banning of practices such as use of debtors prisons and debt peonage, there is more freedom among men in regards to credit. In relation to the furniture case, Williams is subject to the will of the furniture company, and therefor through the terms of the contract she is not free. She explains kinds of freedom that she claims “fundamentally matter.” According to Anderson, a person cannot be considered free unless they are free from all ties to others in which they could be held to the other person’s will (348). Anderson would agree with Williams in her statement claiming that the contract is unconscionable, and therefore disagree with the decision made by the