Nate

A valuable reminder in these hard times.

Problem with mark to market is it only works with assets that have a market.

not sure what that last adjective means when applied to an AI-generated artifact

Gives employers a lovely sheen of objectivity while they hire their neighbor’s kids.

The question used to gauge confidence is whether respondents thought college necessary to “succeed” (presumably financially?). That‘a not a sterling gauge of confidence in the systems methods or products so much as a bare social fact.

One day at a time

bc Latin doesn’t have definite articles or what?

That seems rather consequential?

You need Chinotto

Vampire Money even has the rare reflexive self-check in

They don’t, and they are. Lots of fedsoc members are k-JD types who know that federal clerkships are high-prestige and that fedsoc has a very good network for making clerks and judges. They adopt the ideology in subservience to the resume-polishing, not because they’re deep political thinkers.

I’m simply not sure that an egalitarianism of metrics is sensible. The equal moral worth of persons doesn’t mean that I can’t have different developmental inclinations than others without putting their humanity in question. The problem is that labor markets are standard-metric reliant to a fault.

As an older student (who remembers laughing at the broccoli argument) at a somewhat conservative law school, it is wild to me how readily the current wave of K-JDs now accept the broccoli argument as settled, good faith legal reasoning.

You cannot beat nihilism by appealing to what this means to you. Take direct action or resign.

There seems to be some confusion in your comments about whether “acting as if I had impunity” necessarily entails “acting with impunity” and let’s just be clear: it does not!

Sort of! They’re in the Code of Canon Law.

The former.

You’re joking right?

The dominant move I’m seeing in my institution is to pretend that it hasn’t turned into Calvinball.

What’s the paper called? This was a blast to read!

Getting those jobs requires taking your Econ and carrying the assumption that states are rational value maximizers into your analysis of current events.

Sorry bro, have you maybe forgotten to ask the question of being?

Can we choose the dog? I’ve got a great idea for a philosophy class but it involves a welsh corgi.

There’s no interpretation prior to the “political project,” though. I like my political project better than theirs for lots of reasons, but I’m criticizing their politics, not that their jurisprudence is political. The latter seems unavoidable.

Serious question though: what else were they going to base decisions on? Value-neutral rule of law (of rules) seems more like a liberal fantasy than anything that could actually be practiced.

Ah yes, the primary qualities: extension, solidity, position, and all the colors except purple.

The point isn’t about Article II. It’s asserting a claim by Carl Schmitt that all governments, whether designed to or not, necessarily have one guy in control and that you can identify that guy because he alone can suspend the ordinary operation of law. He’s not confused, he thinks we’re naive.

This is actually my belief except the little guy is an underpaid regular-sized guy somewhere across the globe.

Can we expand this insight to the entire field of case-based pedagogy? Aside from research classes, I don’t really understand why American law isn’t taught in seminar format.