I was recently reading about post-structuralism in reference to a recent Supreme Court decision. Your brilliant article showed me the bigger picture. Thanks!
I was recently reading about post-structuralism in reference to a recent Supreme Court decision. Your brilliant article showed me the bigger picture. Thanks!
I agree. There is a division within jurisprudence analogous to one in literature. Strict constructionists tend to stick to what the words of the law say as written, rejecting any contextual clues to the intent of the law (such as other writings of the founding fathers) as extraneous. At the opposite pole we have interpretations so broad that they leave behind the actual provisions of the law. One side accuses the other of fossilizing the law, the other side in turn accuses the first of legislating from the bench.
The argument then moves away from the law itself and veers into questions of whether the law has any clear interpretation at all and if so, who has the right to say what that interpretation may be. I saw a cartoon many years ago where two parents were arguing over who would push their stroller; meanwhile the stroller rolled off down the hill with the baby and neither noticed. (This is the other way, besides throwing out the bath water, to lose the baby.)
I was recently reading about post-structuralism in reference to a recent Supreme Court decision. Your brilliant article showed me the bigger picture. Thanks!
Wow, what decision was that?
The decision regarding abortion that was based on textualism, a concept that I think is similar to structuralism.
I agree. There is a division within jurisprudence analogous to one in literature. Strict constructionists tend to stick to what the words of the law say as written, rejecting any contextual clues to the intent of the law (such as other writings of the founding fathers) as extraneous. At the opposite pole we have interpretations so broad that they leave behind the actual provisions of the law. One side accuses the other of fossilizing the law, the other side in turn accuses the first of legislating from the bench.
The argument then moves away from the law itself and veers into questions of whether the law has any clear interpretation at all and if so, who has the right to say what that interpretation may be. I saw a cartoon many years ago where two parents were arguing over who would push their stroller; meanwhile the stroller rolled off down the hill with the baby and neither noticed. (This is the other way, besides throwing out the bath water, to lose the baby.)
https://www.poetryfoundation.org/education/glossary/poststructuralism