Archive for the ‘ Philosophy ’ Category

Rand’s Razor v. Gay Marriage

I talk about gay marriage a lot because I believe that it has inter­esting features and conse­quences beyond those commonly subject to discussion. For example, in my Law Review article, “Same-​​​​Sex Marriage and the Federal Spousal Privileges,” I argue that vari­a­tions in state laws dealing with gay marriage create a situation where federal courts may be faced with a novel choice-​​​​of-​​​​law question: To which state’s laws should a federal criminal court look to determine the validity of a marriage for purposes of applying the spousal testi­monial and commu­ni­ca­tions priv­i­leges to same-​​​​sex marriages under Federal Rule of Evidence 501. (That article was finished in April, 2009, and has [ . . . ]

Read the Rest...

Sundae Specials (Initial Thoughts)

Gus Van Horn mentions the diffi­culty of arguing against the government’s use of behavior-​​​​modifying tech­niques in mixed-​​​​government contexts: Unfortunately, everyone is so used to the government owning the roads ... that few so much as bat an eye when they hear of the government looking for ways to psycho­log­i­cally manip­ulate people into doing its bidding. Indeed, in this limited context, it is hard to argue produc­tively against the government taking advantage of such knowledge about human perception. As a law student, this topic has caused me a great deal of concern over the past few months. I have wanted to write something about [ . . . ]

Read the Rest...

Blond(e)s or Redheads?

Comments are expressly solicited. In the course of going about living his life, a man notices that he has a dispro­por­tionate pref­erence for redheads as romantic interests. Not being a lazy man, he engages in some lengthy intro­spection and arrives at the following accurate conclu­sions: His pref­erence for redheads makes him more likely to inves­tigate the possi­bility of romance with redheads than with non-​​​​redheads. Red hair is not a factor bearing any weight on his decision to engage in, continue, or end a romance. His romances with redheads are no more or less healthy and rational than his romances with non-​​​​redheads. He honestly does not [ . . . ]

Read the Rest...

I Love My Toaster

Flibbert blogs about the possi­bility of people in the future marrying robots. I had some thoughts on the topic that were far too long to post in his comments. Here they are. I agree that only things with rights can enter contracts. Marriage, being a constel­lation of legal rela­tion­ships akin to a contract, is only properly available to things with rights. One could not marry one’s toaster. One’s toaster is not a condi­tional, voli­tional consciousness. Its existence is not an end in itself, it does not require sustained action to gain and achieve values in order to continue to exist, it is not required to [ . . . ]

Read the Rest...

The Hymowitz Editorial

I was going to comment on a recent editorial (Kay S. Hymowitz, Freedom Fetishists, Comment. Sept. 2007, at 50, available at http://​www​.commen​tary​magazine​.com/​c​m​/​m​a​i​n​/​v​i​e​w​A​r​t​i​c​l​e​.​h​tml ?id=10925) that paints Ayn Rand and her philosophy of Objectivism in an unpleasant color and with a crude brush. I spent several hours mulling over what I wanted to say about it. But in the end, I decided I really had very little to say that hadn’t already been said. That little boils down to this: Intellectual slop­piness begets intel­lectual slop­piness. Hymowitz should have done some real research, instead of relying on a few prominent Libertarians’ warped inter­pre­ta­tions of Rand’s philosophy, before purporting to speak with [ . . . ]

Read the Rest...

More on Positivism

It occurs to me that the last post was really long. Sorry. Here’s some more on the conse­quences of Positivism. Constitution. From constituere, to fix or establish. The U.S. Constitution was written as an estab­lishing document. It “fixed” the powers of government. If you read the main body, it presents a list of what the government, be it the Executive, Congress, or the Judiciary, may do. In those places where it prohibits the government from doing something, it is always a narrowing of an earlier grant of authority. Fundamentally, the original Constitution, without the Bill of Rights, is an empow­ering document. It [ . . . ]

Read the Rest...

On Philosophy in Legal Education

As you already know, having thor­oughly read and under­stood the About and Policies pages, I am a law student. I attend a public law school in a key Midwestern swing state. This infor­mation is specific enough to narrow the field to a handful of schools, but not so specific that my professors or fellow students might discover my identity. Such a discovery would likely result in an unpleasant situation, as I fully intend to engage in critical commentary on various aspects of my legal education. To wit ~ Law school began for me last year with a one-​​​​week, “intensive,” intro­ductory course titled “Introduction to Law and Legal Systems.” Oh, thought [ . . . ]

Read the Rest...