[Wittrs] Rules, Discretion, Morality and Aesthetics
- From: Sean Wilson <whoooo26505@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2009 19:07:06 -0700 (PDT)
... that's my field, so I appreciate the analogy. It's funny, I was thinking a
similar idea. The matter involves casuistry. Much of what common law decision
making really is -- and really, all supreme court decision making -- is
casuistry. I also wonder to what extent all casuistry isn't really a kind of
aesthetic in a Wittgensteinian sense at the end of the day. Dworkin and others
would consider it "moral reasoning," but I think it is more in the nature of
the cultivation of a proper aesthetic.
----- Original Message ----
From: iro3isdx <xznwrjnk-evca@xxxxxxxxx>
To: wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, September 20, 2009 1:28:19 PM
Subject: [Wittrs] Re: Group Moderation Policy -- Seeking Help
We manage to live with a Supreme Court. The Supreme court usually
presents a justification for its decisions. We can disagree with the
justification, but we cannot appeal it. Like it or not, the decision
of the Supreme Court is final.
For a moderated discussion group, the moderators are the equivalent of
the supreme court.
WEB VIEW: http://tinyurl.com/ku7ga4
TODAY: http://alturl.com/whcf
3 DAYS: http://alturl.com/d9vz
1 WEEK: http://alturl.com/yeza
GOOGLE: http://groups.google.com/group/Wittrs
YAHOO: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Wittrs/
FREELIST: //www.freelists.org/archive/wittrs/09-2009
Other related posts:
- » [Wittrs] Rules, Discretion, Morality and Aesthetics - Sean Wilson
