One of the most insidious forms of intellectual corruption is that of basing one’s political philosophy on the contingent fact of existing legal standards. The most egregious example may be the idolatry of the US constitution - an example with massive influence elsewhere.
A peculiar phenomenon this has thrown up is the public lawyer as some kind of self-styled philosophical oracle.
This figure will purport to tell you what, ultimately, justice is, what democracy is, what the rule of law is, by reference to - guess what? - what the law is, or even just something some judge said.
This is a massive denial of the role of reason in our public life and - through that - an egregious form of disrespect to fellow citizens, who can be silenced or ignored because they are not legal experts.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
One thing worth looking at is how background ethical commitments, often not explicitly articulated because taken to be “obvious”, have framed the public health response to #COVID19 in different countries. 1/4
For example, could it be the initial U.K. strategy of “herd immunity” reflected a utilitarian aggregative approach to the common good combined with a characteristically liberal reluctance to let the state curtail everyday liberties? 2/4
Or consider the contrast in approaches between Germany and Sweden. In the former there is a strong anti-utilitarian tradition focussed on the dignity of each individual life - a tradition with sources in both Catholicism and Kantianism. Did it play a role in shaping policy? 3/4