Robert Black
@hurricanexyz.bsky.social
Constitutional scholar, general law nerd, Izzet mage, bear lover, Mets fan.
Trans rights are constitutional rights!
Uphold Yang Wenli Thought
He/him
https://www.eveningconstitutional.net
Trans rights are constitutional rights!
Uphold Yang Wenli Thought
He/him
https://www.eveningconstitutional.net
I... I don't think that's right?
November 30, 2025 at 7:19 AM
I... I don't think that's right?
Lmao you're not wrong
November 30, 2025 at 7:18 AM
Lmao you're not wrong
🤔
I don't think the idea is to reach equilibrium, I think it's to pursue it (by moving back and forth between our pre-theoretic moral intuitions and our systematic theory, tinkering on both sides so they cohere better and better)
I don't think the idea is to reach equilibrium, I think it's to pursue it (by moving back and forth between our pre-theoretic moral intuitions and our systematic theory, tinkering on both sides so they cohere better and better)
November 30, 2025 at 7:16 AM
🤔
I don't think the idea is to reach equilibrium, I think it's to pursue it (by moving back and forth between our pre-theoretic moral intuitions and our systematic theory, tinkering on both sides so they cohere better and better)
I don't think the idea is to reach equilibrium, I think it's to pursue it (by moving back and forth between our pre-theoretic moral intuitions and our systematic theory, tinkering on both sides so they cohere better and better)
"Did they learn the course material y/n?"
November 30, 2025 at 7:13 AM
"Did they learn the course material y/n?"
I think the last page of Theory is very much in accord with this
November 30, 2025 at 7:12 AM
I think the last page of Theory is very much in accord with this
If you're a good liberal, you should understand that your grandkids' conception of the good may not be your own
November 30, 2025 at 7:11 AM
If you're a good liberal, you should understand that your grandkids' conception of the good may not be your own
"What if we abolish the Electoral College in 50 years? Your grandkids probably won't live in Wyoming anymore by then, anyway!"
November 30, 2025 at 7:10 AM
"What if we abolish the Electoral College in 50 years? Your grandkids probably won't live in Wyoming anymore by then, anyway!"
Akhil Amar talks about this in constitutional design
"Hey guys, what if we put in the Constitution today that we're abolishing slavery in 100 years?"
"Hey guys, what if we put in the Constitution today that we're abolishing slavery in 100 years?"
November 30, 2025 at 7:10 AM
Akhil Amar talks about this in constitutional design
"Hey guys, what if we put in the Constitution today that we're abolishing slavery in 100 years?"
"Hey guys, what if we put in the Constitution today that we're abolishing slavery in 100 years?"
Yeah I actually think he's right about the reflective equilibrium thing. That one isn't cheating.
November 30, 2025 at 7:09 AM
Yeah I actually think he's right about the reflective equilibrium thing. That one isn't cheating.
It is among other things sooooooo deeply toxic on the education side
It's basically why I'm not in academia right now. Being part of The Machine That Sorts People Into Successes And Failures is just soul crushing
It's basically why I'm not in academia right now. Being part of The Machine That Sorts People Into Successes And Failures is just soul crushing
November 30, 2025 at 7:08 AM
It is among other things sooooooo deeply toxic on the education side
It's basically why I'm not in academia right now. Being part of The Machine That Sorts People Into Successes And Failures is just soul crushing
It's basically why I'm not in academia right now. Being part of The Machine That Sorts People Into Successes And Failures is just soul crushing
It sort of makes sense, but also c'mon man
November 30, 2025 at 7:07 AM
It sort of makes sense, but also c'mon man
Yeah he cheats here with "the primary goods"
I really do think this is a problem point for him
I really do think this is a problem point for him
November 30, 2025 at 7:07 AM
Yeah he cheats here with "the primary goods"
I really do think this is a problem point for him
I really do think this is a problem point for him
Yes and that's bad, that whole system is bad
(We don't really have a better idea, yet, but I aspire to one)
(We don't really have a better idea, yet, but I aspire to one)
November 30, 2025 at 7:06 AM
Yes and that's bad, that whole system is bad
(We don't really have a better idea, yet, but I aspire to one)
(We don't really have a better idea, yet, but I aspire to one)
My elementary school* didn't have 'em! I am eternally grateful for it
*teeny tiny Quaker school, but still
*teeny tiny Quaker school, but still
November 30, 2025 at 7:05 AM
My elementary school* didn't have 'em! I am eternally grateful for it
*teeny tiny Quaker school, but still
*teeny tiny Quaker school, but still
Ha. Ad hoc ethics?
I mean Rawls is also explicitly doing the reflective moral equilibrium thing. He says explicitly that you adjust the design of the original position so that it gets you results that "feel right"!
I mean Rawls is also explicitly doing the reflective moral equilibrium thing. He says explicitly that you adjust the design of the original position so that it gets you results that "feel right"!
November 30, 2025 at 7:04 AM
Ha. Ad hoc ethics?
I mean Rawls is also explicitly doing the reflective moral equilibrium thing. He says explicitly that you adjust the design of the original position so that it gets you results that "feel right"!
I mean Rawls is also explicitly doing the reflective moral equilibrium thing. He says explicitly that you adjust the design of the original position so that it gets you results that "feel right"!
People don't like it!
But what this means is that, at most, you have an argument in favor of Rawls's principles of justice, because their adoption maximizes utility! Rawls wins either way!
But what this means is that, at most, you have an argument in favor of Rawls's principles of justice, because their adoption maximizes utility! Rawls wins either way!
November 30, 2025 at 7:03 AM
People don't like it!
But what this means is that, at most, you have an argument in favor of Rawls's principles of justice, because their adoption maximizes utility! Rawls wins either way!
But what this means is that, at most, you have an argument in favor of Rawls's principles of justice, because their adoption maximizes utility! Rawls wins either way!
He observes that many utilitarian philosophers think that you shouldn't make the principle of utility into the *explicit* organizing principle of society
November 30, 2025 at 7:01 AM
He observes that many utilitarian philosophers think that you shouldn't make the principle of utility into the *explicit* organizing principle of society
At the end of the day, the original position does surprisingly little work given how much weight he places on the "strains of commitment"
Basically, people can (most easily) accept having less if they know there was no way to organize society so that *someone* didn't have to have that little
Basically, people can (most easily) accept having less if they know there was no way to organize society so that *someone* didn't have to have that little
November 30, 2025 at 6:59 AM
At the end of the day, the original position does surprisingly little work given how much weight he places on the "strains of commitment"
Basically, people can (most easily) accept having less if they know there was no way to organize society so that *someone* didn't have to have that little
Basically, people can (most easily) accept having less if they know there was no way to organize society so that *someone* didn't have to have that little
He was definitely the GOAT of that specific thing
November 30, 2025 at 6:54 AM
He was definitely the GOAT of that specific thing
(And I do basically buy his assault on the utilitarians)
November 30, 2025 at 6:53 AM
(And I do basically buy his assault on the utilitarians)
(I by no means consider myself a doctrinaire Rawlsian, to be clear. Find him a useful starting point for a lot of things though)
November 30, 2025 at 6:53 AM
(I by no means consider myself a doctrinaire Rawlsian, to be clear. Find him a useful starting point for a lot of things though)
Haha fair
What's your secret third thing?
What's your secret third thing?
November 30, 2025 at 6:52 AM
Haha fair
What's your secret third thing?
What's your secret third thing?
Their motivations are described as purely selfish: weirdly Rawls says that perfect empathy is what would lead to choosing utilitarianism
November 30, 2025 at 6:51 AM
Their motivations are described as purely selfish: weirdly Rawls says that perfect empathy is what would lead to choosing utilitarianism