Tuesday, December 18, 2012

intentional legal arbitariness and motivated reasoning

I think you could write a nearly identical article to this one, replacing "terrorism" with "hate crimes".

But there's a lot more sympathy from lefties towards hate crime legislation introducing intentional arbitrariness into law so that rulings can be flexibly harsh when motivations are of a certain kind, than there is towards legislation that introduces similar arbitrariness when motivations can be labelled with terrorism.

Intentions alone shouldn't drive policy or interpretation of policy.

(And, given certain intentions, coming up with or discarding logical objective reasoning that services those intentions is very easy...)

(I mean, it's easily to justify something you want to believe. Instinctive belief comes first, logical justification comes second.)

No comments: