On Casuistry
philosophynow.org
On Casuistry
1–10 of 50 posts
Re: On Casuistry
#2Merriam-Webster puts the two definitions in the other order, but clearly this is a contentious terrain:
Re: On Casuistry
#3Let me abuse pythonic values:
IMHO, minimum sentencing requirements and a rigid adherence to stare decisis is harmful.[1]
On the other hand, it is helpful to have a reasonable expectation for how things are going to turn out.[2]
I don't have the time to compare and contrast "casuistry" with legal realism, but my hunch is it would end up with the same result: judges figure out how they want to rule and then pick and choose what law to use to get there.
[1] PEP 8 (Quoting Ralph Waldo Emerson), "A Foolish Consistency is the Hobgoblin of Little Minds".
[2] PEP 20, "There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it."
Re: On Casuistry
#4It's easier to get people to agree to a process than a result, so processes make it a lot easier for people to work together.
The processes are imperfect and often take on a life of their own, but still tend to be respected, and are generally improved when the outcomes start getting too far from the spirit of fairness.
Transparent processes which involve specific laws are much easier to respect than opaque "wise elder chooses" processes. Especially when there are many wise elders who might have different opinions.
Re: On Casuistry
#5> Under casuistry, communities themselves deal with those accused of disturbing the community’s peace or of harming some of its members
To think that this turns out well displays either staggering ignorance or the naïvete of an infant. This is how you get lynchings, folks.
Re: On Casuistry
#6> Under casuistry, communities themselves deal with those accused of disturbing the community’s peace or of harming some of its members To think that this turns out well displays either staggering ignorance or the naïvete of an infant. This is how you get lynchings, folks.
Well, the original meaning of casuistry is "the use of clever but unsound reasoning, especially in relation to moral questions; sophistry", which seems apt to this article.
We have another name for what the article is describing, vigilantism.
"Under casuistry, communities themselves deal with those accused of disturbing the community’s peace or of harming some of its members."
I can think of few things more terrifying than a community seeking to impose 'justice' emboldened by the absence of law.
Re: On Casuistry
#7I think one thing that’s very important is that the judicial system needs to be perceived as somewhat “fair” in that the punishment should fit the crime, AND that factors such as race, status, wealth, etc should not bias the outcome. As someone living in the US, it’s quite obvious our system has a lot to be desired in this area, especially when comparing outcomes amongst different ethnicities or wealth classes. But there is an ideal we reach for that our rules should treat every individual equally regardless of their place in life. Giving judges and juries even more latitude than they have already would completely shatter that.
I’d also point out that, given historical context for such methods, anyone giving strong support to this sort of “justice” system really does need to hear the quote that didn’t really come from Einstein :) “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
Re: On Casuistry
#8> Under casuistry, communities themselves deal with those accused of disturbing the community’s peace or of harming some of its members To think that this turns out well displays either staggering ignorance or the naïvete of an infant. This is how you get lynchings, folks.
Well, the original meaning of casuistry is "the use of clever but unsound reasoning, especially in relation to moral questions; sophistry", which seems apt to this article. We have another name for what the article is describing, vigilantism. "Under casuistry, communities themselves deal with those accused of disturbing the community’s peace or of harming some of its members." I can think of few things more terrifyin…
> Well, the original meaning of casuistry is "the use of clever but unsound reasoning, especially in relation to moral questions; sophistry", which seems apt to this article.
Yeah very true. Before I clicked it I thought it would be about something like scholasticism, angels dancing on the head of a pin etc, but really the article itself was the casuistry all along. Kind of funny.
> We have another name for what the article is describing, vigilantism.
Vigilantism is essentially a meaner word of describing what the article describes in weirdly positive language. Russell conjugation and all that. Your vigilantism is my case-based community justice!
Re: On Casuistry
#9> Under casuistry, communities themselves deal with those accused of disturbing the community’s peace or of harming some of its members To think that this turns out well displays either staggering ignorance or the naïvete of an infant. This is how you get lynchings, folks.
> To think that this turns out well displays either staggering ignorance or the naïvete of an infant.
Unfortunately, so does thinking that the alternative, trying to have governments spell out everything in advance and dictate outcomes from the top down without being able to take into account the circumstances of individual cases, turns out well.
The unpleasant truth is that if you live in a community whose members are not good people, you won't have good outcomes, no matter what kind of system you design.
Re: On Casuistry
#10> Under casuistry, communities themselves deal with those accused of disturbing the community’s peace or of harming some of its members To think that this turns out well displays either staggering ignorance or the naïvete of an infant. This is how you get lynchings, folks.
Well, the original meaning of casuistry is "the use of clever but unsound reasoning, especially in relation to moral questions; sophistry", which seems apt to this article. We have another name for what the article is describing, vigilantism. "Under casuistry, communities themselves deal with those accused of disturbing the community’s peace or of harming some of its members." I can think of few things more terrifyin…
> I can think of few things more terrifying than a community seeking to impose 'justice' emboldened by the absence of law.
I can think of few things more terrifying than "law" being imposed on citizens by legislators and bureaucrats who themselves have no skin in the game and suffer no consequences if the laws they impose are bad. We have another name for this too: tyranny.