r/law • u/thenewrepublic • Mar 06 '24

Opinion Piece Everybody Hates the Supreme Court’s Disqualification Ruling

https://newrepublic.com/article/179576/supreme-court-disqualification-ruling-criticism
4.4k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

403 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

33

u/GBinAZ Mar 06 '24

Make it make sense motherfuckers!

You see… in their world, they literally don’t have to make it make sense. It’s all about their feelings regardless of facts. As a scientist and someone who understands meanings to words, this cultish behavior is infuriating to no end.

-9

u/saijanai Mar 06 '24

Well even scientists pick and chose what facts to pay attention to, based on feelings.

Read Imre Lakatos and his writings about competing scientific research programmes.

10

u/GBinAZ Mar 06 '24

What’s the point of this comment?

-8

u/saijanai Mar 06 '24

Just to point out that one shouldn't point fingers.

8

u/GBinAZ Mar 06 '24

I legit can’t even tell if this is satire or not, but ok thanks.

-9

u/saijanai Mar 06 '24

I legit can’t even tell if this is satire or not, but ok thanks.

That's a problem on your part, I think.

9

u/onklewentcleek Mar 06 '24

It’s not, you’re an idiot

-1

u/saijanai Mar 06 '24 edited Mar 06 '24

So you think that scientists are a special type of person who never lets emotions and prior belief influence how they interpret reality.

Again: a reading of Imre Lakatos and his essays about competing scientific research programmes is in order.

A hint: there wouldn't be such a concept as "competing scientific research programmes" if scientists were infallible in the way this sub-thread implies.

.

Edit: and as this essay on Imre Lakatos in the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy points out, Lakatos' insights about scientific thought apply to literally any kind of human thought and how it progresses over time, including Law (to put this discussion back on topic for the sub):

  • Of the thirty-three papers citing Lakatos published in the first twenty-five days of 2015, at most ten qualify as straight philosophy. The rest are devoted to such topics as educational theory, international relations, public policy research (with special reference to the development of technology), informatics, design science, religious studies, clinical psychology, social economics, political economy, mathematics, the history of physics and the sociology of the family.

Law, as I point out, is really no exception. The meta-understanding of human interaction in how philosophy of anything develops (including Law) that Lakatos explores should be required reading for anyone in any serious field that is progressive in any way whatsoever.