Ethicum colloquium, the thread on human conduct.

[Crazed_Insanity]

I can understand the not lined up to their goal part, I just disagree with the men were untrainable statement. If you were a PR firm, you would not include such a statement to explain why you choose to exclude a certain group of people and say it so matter of factly, right?

Anyway, it’s understandable that men in the left are used to this kind of toxic thinking I guess. I’m around center, so just a little irked. For some white male nationalists, they’ll probably be pissed enough to build a wall to prevent the village men from leaving.

[Tom Servo]

Are you saying they should have been more politically correct?

[Crazed_Insanity]

Yes, my PR firm angle is an attempt to remind folks at the left about political correctness. Why was PC all of a sudden out the window?

You know, if the men were indeed untrainable, I’d personally would have no issue. However, that statement wasn’t even factually correct according to the author herself, right?

[FaultyMario]

Is the position of Supreme Court Justice a political one? I'm torn between "strongly agree" and "definitely, yes".

[dodint]

I'd posit that it's more about liberalism and conservatism existing in the same form in both the judicial and political spheres. So it's natural that there would be an alignment come appointment time.

It's more interesting, to me, to see how their leanings shift over a career. 538 tried to quantify it and showed all justices get more liberal as they mature.



https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...hey-get-older/

I could recommend a book that speaks directly to your issue, but it's more about judges that run for public election and doesn't really apply.

[FaultyMario]

mmm... I didn't mean "political" as in electoral.

It obviously is, because three powers of the republic, and the res publica is inherently political.

I meant that its power of interpretation, or how it fills the need for the social compact to be policed, so any interpretation the SCOTUS makes is not a judicial or a philosophical one, but political.

[Crazed_Insanity]

Supreme court in theory shouldn't be political, they should strictly stick to proper interpretation of the constitution. But of course we all know that people can interpret the same exact texts differently... so a justice might appear to be more political to you, but that doesn't mean the court itself is political.

I'd posit that it's more about liberalism and conservatism existing in the same form in both the judicial and political spheres. So it's natural that there would be an alignment come appointment time.

It's more interesting, to me, to see how their leanings shift over a career. 538 tried to quantify it and showed all justices get more liberal as they mature.



https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...hey-get-older/

I could recommend a book that speaks directly to your issue, but it's more about judges that run for public election and doesn't really apply.

That chart is interesting. The trend line shows that if conservative appointed judges live a long long time, they end up becoming more liberal than the liberal appointed judges!

[FaultyMario]

I'm wrong, the SCOTUS is an appellate tribunal. I was speaking from my experience, ours is a constitutional one.

Your link now makes more sense, Nate.

[FaultyMario]

Should people graduate from stuff?

discuss...

[Tom Servo]

I'm not sure I follow?