Julian Sanchez | April 13, 2006
Matt Yglesias has a fun post deploying philosopher Hilary Putnam's idea of semantic externalism as an argument against "original intent" approaches to jurisprudence. Also, intriguingly, Matt mentions that Stanley Fish, of all people, relied on an original intent argument in an old New York Times op-ed. I tracked it down on Nexis, and indeed he does, in the course of attacking Justice Scalia's "textualism." This is very weird indeed, because in Fish's circles, that's called the "intentional fallacy" when you do it with literature.
Reason needs your support. Please donate today!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245