Consent, Belief, Knowledge, Justice

Most Psychological models accept the Aristotelian distinction between one's belief that X is good for one, and one's knowledge that X is good for one. Now, Consent to something, e. g. to an exchange, is usually interpreted as an expression of the consenter's belief that the exchange is beneficial for them. However, the inadequacy of Belief to Knowledge leaves open the possibility that they are consenting to what, in fact, is not beneficial to them. Thus, the Consent to an exchange in which what the consenter receives is not commensurate with what they give, does not suffice to qualify it as 'just'; it merely exempts the other party from responsibility for the violation of Retributive Justice.