|Greg Ritter on 17 Jan 2002 13:31:33 -0000|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|RE: spoon-discuss: Re: spoon-business: Moderation among the justi ce reform|
At 01:19 PM 1/17/2002 +0000, you wrote:
Contrast it with our current, Platonist, system, where we can repeal rule 10 with no ill effects (proof of this is left as an exercise for the reader, or me later when I have more time). In fact, I think in many ways we'd be better off without it, because it claims powers it simply cannot have.
There is nothing inherently Platonist about the current ruleset.Rule 10 only "claims powers it simply cannot have" if you view it from a Platonist perspective.
From the pragmatic viewpoint, it causes no problems because rules are prescriptive, not descriptive. In fact, in this view, Rule 10 becomes the cornerstone for a judicial system because it is the prescription from which the need for further interpretation of rules springs.
Didn't platonism go out with the Ancient Greeks? You are so friggin' passe. Someone pass that boy a stylish pink scarf.
Yay Pragmatism! --gritter