Difference between revisions of "OCT 26"

From Alfino
Jump to navigationJump to search
(Created page with "==17: OCT 26== ===Assigned=== :*Haidt, Chapter 8: The Conservative Advantage (34) ===Some notes relevant to the Role of Political Parties=== :*I'll share some notes from a...")
 
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==17: OCT 26==
+
==18: OCT 26==
 +
 
 
===Assigned===
 
===Assigned===
  
:*Haidt, Chapter 8: The Conservative Advantage (34)
+
:*Tribe, Lawrence. "Deconstructing Dobbs" (1st half, 1-9)
 
+
:*Supreme Court of the US, "Excerpts from the Dobbs Decision," (13-29)
===Some notes relevant to the Role of Political Parties===
 
 
 
:*I'll share some notes from a ''New Yorker'' article, Jelani Cobb, "How Parties Die," March 15, 2021.
 
 
 
===Haidt, Chapter 8: The Conservative Advantage===
 
 
 
:*Hadit's critique of Dems:  Dems offer sugar (Care) and salt (Fairness), conservatives appeal to all five receptors.  Imagine the value of "rewriting" our own or opposing ideologies as Haidt imagined doing.  Dems should appeal to loyalty and authority more.  Neglect may be ommission and underrepresent Dems (recall discussion of labels and issues.  We could add "values".)
 
 
 
:*Republicans seemed to Haidt to understand moral psych better, not because they were fear mongering, but triggering all of the moral moral foundations.  Equalizer metaphor.
 
 
 
:*'''Measuring Morals'''
 
 
 
:*'''The MFQ''': consistency across cultures; large n;
 
 
 
:*162: Correlations of pol orientation with preferences for dog breeds, training, sermon styles.  You can catch liberal and conservative "surprise" in the EEG and fMRI.(similar to early Hibbing reading). 
 
 
 
:*'''What Makes People Vote Republican?'''
 
 
 
:*biographical note about tracking Obama on left/right triggers.  Message on parental resp, but then shift to social justice, global citizenship, omitted flag lapel pin. 
 
 
 
:*164: Haidt's argument for replacing "old story" of political difference: there's something wrong with conservatives!  Note reactions to his essay: some libs/conserv found it hard to establish a positive view of their "opponents".  Haidt has implicit critique of Libs by saying that organic society can't just be about 2 foundations.  Experience with his essay.  follow.
 
 
 
:*'''Mill vs. Durkheim''' - responses to the challenge of living with strangers in modern society.  Individualism vs. Organic society. Haidt’s essay triggers lots of political venom. From that response, however, Haidt noticed that he was missing a foundation:  Fairness as proportionality.  You reap what you sow.  The fairness foundation mixed fairness as equality and fairness as proportionality. 
 
  
::*'''6th Moral foundation:''' liberty and oppression: taking the "fairness as equality" from Fairness and considers it in terms of Liberty/Oppression.  [Some discussion here.  Note relation to Authority/Leadership in Hibbing. Equality here means social equality and social hierarchy. When do we expect equal treatment? When do we tolerate hierarchy? When to we rebel. Similarity to Authority/subversion, but more than legitimacy of one authority figure, rather social hierarchy. 
+
===In-class===
  
:*'''The Liberty / Oppression Foundation'''
+
:*Some basic data on abortions from Pew [https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2023/01/11/what-the-data-says-about-abortion-in-the-u-s-2/]. 
 +
:*Comparting gestational limits by country.[https://righttolife.org.uk/what-are-the-abortion-time-limits-in-eu-countries].  Note: This is from a right to life group, but I have seen similar data elsewhere.
 +
:*Small group: Basic understand of Dobbs decision and related issues.
 +
::*In your small group, work through these questions to check on your understand.
 +
:::*What was the basic thinking on abortion in the Roe and Casey courts?
 +
:::*How did the majority decide Dobbs?  Explain the role of interpretive theories of the constitution in this decision (originalism v living document).
 +
:::*Does abortion seem like a "majoritarian" (statutory) right or a "basic liberty" (constitutional or otherwise protected from rule by a simple majority of either state or federal government)? Try out arguments either way.
 +
:::*Keep track of questions that arise during your discussion.
  
::*”The desire for equality more closely related to psychology of liberty / oppression that reciprocal altruism. 
+
===Lawrence Tribe, “Deconstructing Dobbs”, NYRB, Sept 22, 2022===
  
::*Evolutionary story about hierarchy.
+
:*Concerns: 10 year old rape victim in Ohio; criminal penalties for doctors, no IVF, Texas style enforcement, criminalizing abortion seeking? Point: Dobbs is creating lots of uncertainty in the law.   
:::*Original triggers: bullies and tyrants, current triggers: illegit. restraint on liberty.  
 
:::*Evolutionary/Archeological story: egalitarianism in hunter gatherers, hierarchy comes with agriculture.
 
:::*Emergence of pre-ag dominance strategies -- 500,000ya weapons for human conflict (and language to complain about bullies and tyrants) takes off. This changes the strategic problem.  Parallel in Chimps:  revolutions: "reverse dominance hierarchies" are possible.   
 
  
:::*Cultural Evo Theory on cultural strategies toward equality: Societies make transition to some form of political egalitarianism (equality of citizenship or civic equality)We've had time to select for people who can tolerate political equality and surrender violence to the state.  (Got to mention dueling here.) Culture domestics us. '''"Self-domestication".'''   
+
:*The jurisprudence:
 +
::*Roe and Casey had created settled law, contra majority. 
 +
::*Majority makes Roe and Casey look like isolated precedents, abberations, but not so. 
 +
::*Criticism of the court's treatment of the 9th amendment:
 +
:::*9th: enumeration of rights isn’t exhaustive. problem of "unenumerated rights".  Constitution says they exist, but can't list them.  Invites "living document" approach. see p. 3.   
 +
:::*But the Majority just say that they don't find abortion among the unenumerated rights referred to by 9th am. Tribe thinks that's an odd claim to make since the 9th just says ''any'' (unspecified) rights not enumerated are still reserved to the People.
 +
::*'''Majority decision doesn't say why compelling pregnancy isn't a violation of liberty.'''
 +
::*The court has found unenumerated aspects of other rights, extending 1st am for example.
 +
::*Agrees with dissent that travel rights could be impacted, not withstanding Kavanaugh's claim. p. 5
 +
::*Reviews the approach to liberty of contract in Lochner Era: SC used to strike down min wage laws on grounds of "liberty of contract".
 +
::*Agrees with the dissent that merely saying abortion is different from other rights supported by Roe and Casey (like contraception and same sex marriage) isn't sufficient because they are clearly analogous.  p. 6
 +
::*Key argument against the decision at p. 7: Dobbs doesn't recognize fetus as a legal person yet allows it's interests to supersede the interests of the legal person who gestates it. Tribe quotes from his one arguments in Roe v Wade that the development of the fetus is continuous and does not offer a clear distinction between potential and actual life.
  
::*Liberal vs. Conservative triggers on Liberty/Oppression: 
+
===Supreme Court, Excerpts from Dobbs (13-29)===
:::*Liberals experience this in terms of universalistic goals like social justice, abuse of the power of the most fortunate. Oppressed individuals. 
 
:::*Conservatives triggered more by group level concerns. The nanny state is oppression, taxation is oppressive, globalism is a threat to sovereignty. 
 
  
:*'''Fairness as Proportionality''’
+
:*From the dissent: Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan.
:::*After mortgage crisis recession of 2008 some like Santelli thought it unfair to bail out banks and borrowers. This is really a conservative version of fairness as proportionality, which shares some features of the "reciprocal altruism", such as necessity of punishment.
+
::*Opening claim at 13, Roe/Casey engaged in a balance of interests recognizing difference in moral viewpoint.
 +
::*In practice, after Casey, states were allowing states to impose some restrictions before viability (but not a "substantial obstacle", prohibition after viability, protecting maternal health after viability.
 +
::*Claims that Dobbs: allows state to compel gestation even in cases that endanger maternal health, or cases of rape and incest, severe fetal abnormalities (ex. Tay-Sachs disease). Also, potential for states to prohibit travel, possibility of Federal ban (which means states don't have the right).
 +
::*The decision "curtails the rights of women and status as free and equal citizens." Potentially includes other rights: contraception, marriage...
 +
::*Basic liberties: 17 “protecting autonomous decision making over the most personal of life decisions.
  
::*'''Public Goods games''' (again). Setup1.6 multiplierStill, best strategy is not to contributealtruistic punishment can be stimulated (84% doeven without immediate rewardcooperation increases. 84% paid to punish because we are triggered by slackers and free riders.
+
::*Historical record:  19th century criminalization of abortion was short term change, common law not so harsh on “pre-quickening” abortion.  (21).  
 +
::*The ratifiers of the 14th am were all menThey did not consider women to be equal members of the societySince we do, this undermines aspects of their thinking.   
 +
::*On interpretation:  "living document" argument (24); reviews history of using the 14th to strike down miscegenation laws, allow gay marriage. response to conservative concerns 25. Evolution of meaning of "liberty" still tied to constitutional principles(It won't be "anything goes".)
 +
::*Dobbs majority lowers the test of an abortion law's constitutional legitimacy to "rational basis" (lowest standard -- basic liberties use "strict scrutiny"). rational basis standard may ignore maternal health, allow travel restrictions, prevent medical abortion. 28
  
::*In the research on Liberty / Oppression, Haidt and others find that concerns about political equality track Lib/Oppression, so fairness is about proportionality. 
+
===Finding the language of basic liberties===
  
:*Summary: Liberals have emphasize C, F, Lib while conservatives balance all sixLibs construe Fairness in more egalitarian ways and have diff emphasis for Liberty/OppressionMany liberals and conservatives have a hard time forming a positive image of each other, but when you think about this, it sounds like something to work on.  In light of this research and theorizing, one could see that as a character flaw or unsupported bias.
+
:*For John Stuart Mill, the language of basic liberties starts with freedom of conscience, thought, and discussionBut that's not enoughYou also have to be able to live your life according to your own way of thinking, without interference from church, state, or any other coercive power.
  
===Note on "Social Epistemology"===
+
:*In practice, specific areas of our lives seem to be the focus of liberty, so the "language of basic liberty" might include the way we talk about these area.  The integrity and privacy of our bodies, the ability to make decisions about what happens to and in my body.  By extension, the privacy of my intimate relationships.  But the ability to live my identity publicly requires some toleration of my choices and my identity.  Of course, others have freedom of conscience as well.  So they may think what they want about me, but enjoyment of basic liberty involves a commitment not to treat others unequally because of our differences.
  
:*'''Philosophical Method point:''' The follow line of thought is also example of philosophical speculationWe are venturing a bit beyond the research itself to extract significance and insight.
+
:*Body, Bodily Autonomy, and Physical Intimacy:
 +
::*In a free society, you should expect to have a great deal of control and decision-making about your body, your health, and intimacy.  Some of these liberties are covered by your due process rights, which place rules on the condition under which you can be incarcerated, especially prior to a trialBut many other bodily autonomy rights are not specifically enumerated as basic liberties.  How do you respond to the following hypothetical constraints on liberty? Some you may find easier to locate your response than others. Note that. Try to describe your reaction, including reasoning.
  
:*"Social Epistemology" means a variety of things in philosophy.  Here, the idea that some traits relevant to group problem solving are distributed in a population (call this a "demographic epistemic trait" AND that this variation might play a role in optimizing group decision-making.
+
::*Examples: Which of these laws would violate a "basic liberty" (something that should not be decided by majority rule?)  Which of these are easy and which more complicated?  Can you think of more examples?
  
:*Think about evidence from Haidt and Hibbing about divergences in cognitive style and problem solving (BeanFest!) and perception from pol. orientation. They might be "epistemic demographic traits".  EDTs
+
:::*A law allowing discrimination against women for hiring to jobs deemed too hard for women.
 +
:::*Pumping a person’s stomach for drugs as part of a criminal investigation. 
 +
:::*Forced sterilization, forced reproduction.
 +
:::*A law prohibiting vasectomies or requiring men to reverse them.
 +
:::*A law allowing anyone doubting a student athlete’s eligibility for a team sport to demand “genital inspection” (actual proposed law, tabled).
 +
:::*A law prohibiting you from receiving gender affirming care from a physician. 
 +
:::*A law prohibiting tattoos.
 +
:::*A law forcing a person to get an abortion.
 +
:::*A law requiring end of life medical care against a person’s wishes. (Note diffs among states.)
 +
:::*A law requiring blood donations.
 +
:::*A law prohibiting same sex marriage and intimacy or contraception.
 +
:::*A law requiring you to notify the government when you travel or restricting travel.
 +
:::*A law requiring you to register with the government to access social media or when you rent a hotel room.
 +
:::*A law requiring cis-gender conforming dress and behavior in public.
 +
:::*A law allowing police or others gov't representative to do a "wellness check" on you. 
 +
:::*A law allowing the gov't to remove weapons from your possession on reports of erratic or disturbing reports about you, including disturbing social media posts.
 +
:::*A law requiring employer's to pay a minimum wage, regulate contracts, etc.   
  
:*Speculative questions about such traits (I am not aware of a theory about this yet): Are there are EDTs? Maybe just DTsWould human populations with some optimal variation in EDTs do better than ones with more or less than an optimal range? Think workgroups for examples, also.
+
::Some “maybe nots”. Maybe these would not violate basic libertiesWith these items (assuming you agree), try to develop language for saying why liberty is not violated by the law. If you disagree, try to express your reasons.
  
:*Related literature: Wisdom of Crowds [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wisdom_of_Crowds] and research on group decision making under conditions of cognitive diversity.
+
:::*Maybe not: A law legalizing very addictive and deadly drugs.
 +
:::*Maybe not: Limiting access to dangerous biological agents or radioactive materials.
 +
:::*Maybe not: Laws regulating explosives and bomb making materials, including surface to air missiles.
 +
:::*Maybe not: A law decriminalizing sex with minors. 
 +
:::*Maybe not: A law allowing someone to choose to become an indentured servant or slave.
 +
:::*Maybe not: A law allowing first responders to restraint or detain or medicate a person in a mental health crisis from harming themselves. 
 +
:::*Maybe not: A law prohibiting private companies from imposing appropriate workplace attire rules, and confidentiality agreements.
 +
:::*Maybe not: A law prohibiting public nudity.

Latest revision as of 17:27, 26 October 2023

18: OCT 26

Assigned

  • Tribe, Lawrence. "Deconstructing Dobbs" (1st half, 1-9)
  • Supreme Court of the US, "Excerpts from the Dobbs Decision," (13-29)

In-class

  • Some basic data on abortions from Pew [1].
  • Comparting gestational limits by country.[2]. Note: This is from a right to life group, but I have seen similar data elsewhere.
  • Small group: Basic understand of Dobbs decision and related issues.
  • In your small group, work through these questions to check on your understand.
  • What was the basic thinking on abortion in the Roe and Casey courts?
  • How did the majority decide Dobbs? Explain the role of interpretive theories of the constitution in this decision (originalism v living document).
  • Does abortion seem like a "majoritarian" (statutory) right or a "basic liberty" (constitutional or otherwise protected from rule by a simple majority of either state or federal government)? Try out arguments either way.
  • Keep track of questions that arise during your discussion.

Lawrence Tribe, “Deconstructing Dobbs”, NYRB, Sept 22, 2022

  • Concerns: 10 year old rape victim in Ohio; criminal penalties for doctors, no IVF, Texas style enforcement, criminalizing abortion seeking? Point: Dobbs is creating lots of uncertainty in the law.
  • The jurisprudence:
  • Roe and Casey had created settled law, contra majority.
  • Majority makes Roe and Casey look like isolated precedents, abberations, but not so.
  • Criticism of the court's treatment of the 9th amendment:
  • 9th: enumeration of rights isn’t exhaustive. problem of "unenumerated rights". Constitution says they exist, but can't list them. Invites "living document" approach. see p. 3.
  • But the Majority just say that they don't find abortion among the unenumerated rights referred to by 9th am. Tribe thinks that's an odd claim to make since the 9th just says any (unspecified) rights not enumerated are still reserved to the People.
  • Majority decision doesn't say why compelling pregnancy isn't a violation of liberty.
  • The court has found unenumerated aspects of other rights, extending 1st am for example.
  • Agrees with dissent that travel rights could be impacted, not withstanding Kavanaugh's claim. p. 5
  • Reviews the approach to liberty of contract in Lochner Era: SC used to strike down min wage laws on grounds of "liberty of contract".
  • Agrees with the dissent that merely saying abortion is different from other rights supported by Roe and Casey (like contraception and same sex marriage) isn't sufficient because they are clearly analogous. p. 6
  • Key argument against the decision at p. 7: Dobbs doesn't recognize fetus as a legal person yet allows it's interests to supersede the interests of the legal person who gestates it. Tribe quotes from his one arguments in Roe v Wade that the development of the fetus is continuous and does not offer a clear distinction between potential and actual life.

Supreme Court, Excerpts from Dobbs (13-29)

  • From the dissent: Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan.
  • Opening claim at 13, Roe/Casey engaged in a balance of interests recognizing difference in moral viewpoint.
  • In practice, after Casey, states were allowing states to impose some restrictions before viability (but not a "substantial obstacle", prohibition after viability, protecting maternal health after viability.
  • Claims that Dobbs: allows state to compel gestation even in cases that endanger maternal health, or cases of rape and incest, severe fetal abnormalities (ex. Tay-Sachs disease). Also, potential for states to prohibit travel, possibility of Federal ban (which means states don't have the right).
  • The decision "curtails the rights of women and status as free and equal citizens." Potentially includes other rights: contraception, marriage...
  • Basic liberties: 17 “protecting autonomous decision making over the most personal of life decisions.”
  • Historical record: 19th century criminalization of abortion was short term change, common law not so harsh on “pre-quickening” abortion. (21).
  • The ratifiers of the 14th am were all men. They did not consider women to be equal members of the society. Since we do, this undermines aspects of their thinking.
  • On interpretation: "living document" argument (24); reviews history of using the 14th to strike down miscegenation laws, allow gay marriage. response to conservative concerns 25. Evolution of meaning of "liberty" still tied to constitutional principles. (It won't be "anything goes".)
  • Dobbs majority lowers the test of an abortion law's constitutional legitimacy to "rational basis" (lowest standard -- basic liberties use "strict scrutiny"). rational basis standard may ignore maternal health, allow travel restrictions, prevent medical abortion. 28

Finding the language of basic liberties

  • For John Stuart Mill, the language of basic liberties starts with freedom of conscience, thought, and discussion. But that's not enough. You also have to be able to live your life according to your own way of thinking, without interference from church, state, or any other coercive power.
  • In practice, specific areas of our lives seem to be the focus of liberty, so the "language of basic liberty" might include the way we talk about these area. The integrity and privacy of our bodies, the ability to make decisions about what happens to and in my body. By extension, the privacy of my intimate relationships. But the ability to live my identity publicly requires some toleration of my choices and my identity. Of course, others have freedom of conscience as well. So they may think what they want about me, but enjoyment of basic liberty involves a commitment not to treat others unequally because of our differences.
  • Body, Bodily Autonomy, and Physical Intimacy:
  • In a free society, you should expect to have a great deal of control and decision-making about your body, your health, and intimacy. Some of these liberties are covered by your due process rights, which place rules on the condition under which you can be incarcerated, especially prior to a trial. But many other bodily autonomy rights are not specifically enumerated as basic liberties. How do you respond to the following hypothetical constraints on liberty? Some you may find easier to locate your response than others. Note that. Try to describe your reaction, including reasoning.
  • Examples: Which of these laws would violate a "basic liberty" (something that should not be decided by majority rule?) Which of these are easy and which more complicated? Can you think of more examples?
  • A law allowing discrimination against women for hiring to jobs deemed too hard for women.
  • Pumping a person’s stomach for drugs as part of a criminal investigation.
  • Forced sterilization, forced reproduction.
  • A law prohibiting vasectomies or requiring men to reverse them.
  • A law allowing anyone doubting a student athlete’s eligibility for a team sport to demand “genital inspection” (actual proposed law, tabled).
  • A law prohibiting you from receiving gender affirming care from a physician.
  • A law prohibiting tattoos.
  • A law forcing a person to get an abortion.
  • A law requiring end of life medical care against a person’s wishes. (Note diffs among states.)
  • A law requiring blood donations.
  • A law prohibiting same sex marriage and intimacy or contraception.
  • A law requiring you to notify the government when you travel or restricting travel.
  • A law requiring you to register with the government to access social media or when you rent a hotel room.
  • A law requiring cis-gender conforming dress and behavior in public.
  • A law allowing police or others gov't representative to do a "wellness check" on you.
  • A law allowing the gov't to remove weapons from your possession on reports of erratic or disturbing reports about you, including disturbing social media posts.
  • A law requiring employer's to pay a minimum wage, regulate contracts, etc.
Some “maybe nots”. Maybe these would not violate basic liberties. With these items (assuming you agree), try to develop language for saying why liberty is not violated by the law. If you disagree, try to express your reasons.
  • Maybe not: A law legalizing very addictive and deadly drugs.
  • Maybe not: Limiting access to dangerous biological agents or radioactive materials.
  • Maybe not: Laws regulating explosives and bomb making materials, including surface to air missiles.
  • Maybe not: A law decriminalizing sex with minors.
  • Maybe not: A law allowing someone to choose to become an indentured servant or slave.
  • Maybe not: A law allowing first responders to restraint or detain or medicate a person in a mental health crisis from harming themselves.
  • Maybe not: A law prohibiting private companies from imposing appropriate workplace attire rules, and confidentiality agreements.
  • Maybe not: A law prohibiting public nudity.