I am not sure on the distinction between choice and personal choice; it would seem that choices are almost by definition personal. When I wrote the below, I was thinking of some of the more corrupt legal systems (such as the one I am currently living in) where it often seems like a legal ruling *becomes* a matter of personal choice. (A court may choose to convict or not seemingly with little reference to the facts of the case) Surely, this is not the state of affairs that should be aspired to. O.K. ________________________________ From: Walter C. Okshevsky <wokshevs@xxxxxx> To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Friday, February 22, 2013 1:22 PM Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Truly I'd say "choice" is inappropriate in this context, but not because it is equivalent to "personal choice" (which it isn't) but rather because convicting or not is a matter of "decision." Both competencies require deliberation as the process through which the respective products are *made* (interesting metaphor). But decision-making would seem to be more tightly constrained and governed by extant criteria, norms and principles than acts of choice. Choice is more open-ended as to its bases/grounds and options available. I think this holds also in French, German and Russian. (Don't know about Latin or Greek, but methinks we may soon be enlightened.) An interesting educational question here is how we should go about teaching for these competencies. If there is a difference in meaning, does that not signal a need for different pedagogies and modes of learning? Of course, there are situations in which the difference is moot: i.e., whether one *decides* on the firing squad rather than the guillotine, or *chooses* one over the other, the end result is the same for most intents and porpoises. Choosing to read Habermas and reconstructing human communicative competence while mercilessly snowed-in on the Avalon, Walter O. Quoting Omar Kusturica <omarkusto@xxxxxxxxx>: > Well, I don't think that convicting or not convicting is supposed to be a > matter of 'choice'. Aren't judges and juries supposed to be compelled by the > facts, or lack of them ? If it ever comes down to a matter of personal choice > then there is probably something fishy going on. > > > O.K. > > > > ________________________________ > From: "Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx" <Jlsperanza@xxxxxxx> > To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2013 7:50 PM > Subject: [lit-ideas] Truly > > McEvoy, in "Jurisprudence" refers to > > ""she truly believed she had no real choice" to convict - because, while > she subjectively believed or felt she had no real choice, objectively she had > > a choice and so her belief was not a "truly believed"; and on another > reading to acquit - because, while objectively she had a choice, > nevertheless > she subjectively "truly believed" she had no choice. [Those familiar with > Kant's first Critique will know the trouble he had resolving the subjective > and objective aspects of things, and the voluminous literature that has > ensued, and so might understand why a judge might stay clear of trying to > sort > this out for the jury." > > Indeed, the adverb 'truly' can be a trick. > > I think Hart, borrowing from Bentham, would distinguish between internal > and external readings, and this is something Grice also essays in his > "Aspects of Reason". > > "Truly", on the other hand, can be what was called in Oxford, with artless > sexism, a trouser-word. > > She truly believed she had no real choice. > > ANOTHER SCENARIO: > > Jack: did he believe it? > Jill: He believes that p. > > Jack believes that p. > Jack truly believes that pl > Truly, Jack believes that p. > > It seems that 'truly', as Ramsey said about 'true', is redundant (Grice > refers to Ramsey's 'redundance' theory of truth). > > Try 'sincerely'. > > Etc. > > Cheers, > > Speranza > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, > digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html This electronic communication is governed by the terms and conditions at http://www.mun.ca/cc/policies/electronic_communications_disclaimer_2012.php ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html