Originalism Best Advances Americans’ Human Flourishing: The Law-as-Coordination Account of Originalism

2019 ◽  
pp. 221-309
Keyword(s):  
2005 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-31
Author(s):  
DAVID M MYERS

Kudos to Professor Mirko Bagaric and James McConvill for their well-informed review of the new happiness research, and for their provocative ideas on how such research might define new criteria for making laws that optimally advance human flourishing. As one who has followed and reported on this new research, I concur that it has the potential to guide public policies. 


Author(s):  
David Novak

This chapter focuses on the prohibition of robbery, which is based on the principle that society is necessary for human flourishing. And a central element of the construction of any human society is property, or the relation of persons to things, especially in economic transactions. The rabbinic tradition makes fine distinctions between Jews and gentiles regarding robbery, ultimately creating a double standard. Although the practical effects of a socially unfair law were removed, the rabbis maintained that Noahide law remained stricter than Jewish law regarding robbery. Like other violations of the Noahide commandments, the penalty was assumed to be death. In atypical historical circumstances—especially times of war or oppression—the rabbinic supposition was that all gentile robbery was aggressive and occurred because of anti-Jewish attitudes and not greed. Because the crime was ideological and not practical, its intent was far more lethal and therefore any act of robbery, no matter how minor, was to be punished with death.


Author(s):  
Joshua Ralston

Joshua Ralston observes that the Christian tendency to place law in an oppositional relationship to love, grace, and/or the gospel has had unfortunate byproducts. It denigrates Judaism and Islam and misconstrues their conceptions of the Compassionate One who gives Torah and/or shari‘a for the sake of human flourishing. Thinking beyond such divisions, this essay explores points of convergence and divergence in the thinking of the Protestant reformer John Calvin and the Islamic jurist, mystic, and reformer al-Ghazali. Al-Ghazali’s understanding of shari‘a as a pathway to the common good that is willed by the Compassionate and Merciful One resonates with Calvin’s third use of the law. Together, these revise the adversarial renderings of law in Calvin’s first and second uses. Christian theology might therefore embrace an understanding of gospel and law—or, better, the way or shari’a of God—that focuses on the path to flourishing.


2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 72-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Leslie ◽  
Mary Casper

“My patient refuses thickened liquids, should I discharge them from my caseload?” A version of this question appears at least weekly on the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's Community pages. People talk of respecting the patient's right to be non-compliant with speech-language pathology recommendations. We challenge use of the word “respect” and calling a patient “non-compliant” in the same sentence: does use of the latter term preclude the former? In this article we will share our reflections on why we are interested in these so called “ethical challenges” from a personal case level to what our professional duty requires of us. Our proposal is that the problems that we encounter are less to do with ethical or moral puzzles and usually due to inadequate communication. We will outline resources that clinicians may use to support their work from what seems to be a straightforward case to those that are mired in complexity. And we will tackle fears and facts regarding litigation and the law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document