Philosophy@Utah State

Home » Uncategorized » More on Originalism and the Constitution

More on Originalism and the Constitution

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 101 other followers

Old Main, USU

T-shirts


You need a Philosophy T-shirt! For more information, please click here.

ANNOUNCEMENTS

* Interested in presenting a paper at an UNDERGRADUATE PHILOSOPHY CONFERENCE or publishing in an UNDERGRADUATE PHILOSOPHY JOURNAL? You should consider it! To see what options are available, both in state and out of state, click here.

PHILOSOPHY BOWLING RESULTS

• Is the world eternal? YES
• Do humans have contra-causal free will (i.e., can humans do otherwise)? NO
• Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? YES
• Do humans have souls? YES
• Are there natural rights? YES
• Is it morally permissible to eat meat? NO
• Is the unexamined life worth living? NO
• Is truth subjectivity? YES
• Is virtue necessary for happiness? YES
• Can a computer have a mind? YES
• Can humans know reality as it is in itself? YES
• Is hell other people? YES
• Can art be created accidentally? NO
• Can we change the past? NO
• Are numbers real? NO
• Is it always better to know the truth? YES

Blog Stats

  • 193,024 hits

We’ve had some discussion of originalism on this blog.  My recollection of the discussion was that people on this blog (who represent various political stripes) found it attractive.  Most found Scalia’s talk here at USU pretty compelling.

Well, I thought it worth pointing out how conservatives – who usually hail originalism – too often abandon it when it suits them.  An article here discusses how the SC really manufactured a right for individuals to bear arms (with no reference to militias).  The trouble is that originalism devolves into judicial policy activism when the original intent of the framers is unclear.  It is my understanding, from Scalia, that SC judges should always, in such cases, defer to the legislature rather than enshrine in Con-law our current fancies.  But Scalia, in this decision (he wrote the majority opinion), seems to have taken this question away from the people.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: