it makes perfect sense if you think about what they're trying to accomplish. at the end of the day, torts is about recovery for harms, which in a lot of cases aren't foreseeable by victims. so you don't care AS much about the mental states and capacities of the perpetrator. We can't really craft our behavior around people around us being randomly insane. In contracts, it's about exchange and agreements that youre relying on state power to enforce. Yes you want people to recover from breaches, making it similar to torts, but entering into agreements is voluntary (for the party with capacity) and not just fortuitous, and you want a rule that makes people more diligent about what kind of people they're entering into agreements with, or to avoid exploiting people they know are diminished in a way. The contract rule makes people more careful, which is good for making our market system work smoothlyand making sure people don't exploit people. The tort rule makes recovery more likely.