Thursday, November 30, 2006

Kant and the First Amendment

The First Amendment guarantees that "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech." One common question, then, is what constitutes speech? The easy answer would be any form of oral utterance. But that's simulataneously too broad and too narrow. There are some utterances, like nonsense, which are obviously not what the First Amendment is meant to protect. And there are some things, like political tracts, which are not oral utterances, but seem like they should fall under the First Amendment. So, painted very broadly, most people speak of the First Amendment as protecting 'expressive activity'. But this is also problematic (though mostly because most law professors/judges are not aestheticians).

Take erotic dance. For some reason, states like to regulate erotic dancing. Proponents of these sorts of measures like to argue that erotic dance isn't really art, it's more like pornography. Why isn't it art? Well, it doesn't express any message. It's just naked people moving around. But that fundamentally misunderstands the way in which art communicates its 'message'.

Art is not like political tracts. Political tracts put forth, or attempt to put forth, a single, unambiguous message. But art doesn't do that. Art, or at least good art, tends to communicate aesthetic ideas, and it does that by giving rise to the free play of the imagination. So it is wrong to say that something isn't art because it's hard to say what 'the' message is. Art is art precisely because it does not have a message, but because it stimulates the imagination. And this is true whether we're talking about erotic dance or a picture of some fruit.

So we need to be careful, in thinking about regulating expressive conduct, that we don't toss out some conduct just because we're not sure what good it does. There's an awful lot of art and literature, things people generally agree are art and literature, where people aren't really sure what good it does. But because we generally believe that this sort of thing is good, and because with a bit of study we know that it's good because it gives rise to the free play of the imagination, we shouldn't get rid of something just because we personally happening not to like it.

Wednesday, November 29, 2006

Pope vs. Islam, round one

A while ago, there was a bit of a furor over comments the Pope made in a speech in Bavaria, and now that he's visiting Turkey, his comments are once again in the spotlight. The reaction, famously, was a wave of violence. This would seem to be a bad reaction -- if you believe that someone is falsely accusing your religion of being inherently violent, reacting violently to that accusation only gives your opponents more fuel to the fire. But beyond the irony of this reaction, there is a better reaction available, one that reacts to the comments as it was actually made.

It is important to note that this quote comes in the context of a dialogue between the Byzantine Emperor and a Persian scholar. The Emperor says "Show me what is new in Islam, and I will show that it is only evil and violent."* That this is what is meant is clear from the context. It is a dialogue, not a monologue, and it is also an attempt on the part of the Emperor to show that violence and true religion should not mix. So what would be an appropriate response on the part of the Muslim community?

An appropriate response would be to show what is unique in Islam that doesn't revolve around violence, or to that Islam is not inherently a violent religion. (Christians who are accused of belonging to a violent religion have any number of quotes from the gospels and epistles to show that violence is not essential to their religion; I don't know the Qur'an well enough to know what a Muslim might cite.) Alternatively, one could argue that Islam is a violent religion, and argue that this is well and good -- this would respond to the second part of the Emperor's argument, where he writes "God is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats."

And it is these parts of the Emperor's speech that the Pope intended to support. There is no reason to think that, by quoting a Byzantine Emperor, the Pope intended to call for a new crusade, or even to indicate agreement with anything that emperor said that wasn't quoted. I sometimes quote from Nietzsche -- that hardly indicates that I agree with everything Nietzsche said, but merely that I like what he said in that quote.

The BBC has more excerpts from the Pope's speech here. I recommend reading these excerpts to understate why the Pope was not criticizing Islam, except to the extent Islam actually is violent, but speaking eloquently about the relation between reason, faith, and peace in the Christian religion.

*The exact quote is "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached."

Sunday, November 26, 2006

First try at a meme

Well, I've never done a meme because, to be honest, most of them seem kinda stupid. But this one seemed interesting, so I thought I'd give it a shot.

IF YOUR LIFE WAS A MOVIE, WHAT WOULD THE SOUNDTRACK BE?
REMEMBER DON'T CHEAT!
So, here's how it works:
1. Open your library (iTunes, Winamp, Media Player, iPod, etc)
2. Put it on shuffle
3. Press play
4. For every question, type the song that's playing
5. When you go to a new question, press the next button
6. Don't lie and try to pretend your cool...

OPENING CREDITS: "Teenage Dirtbag" by Wheatus -- Okay, apparently it's going to be one of those sorts of movies.

WAKING UP: "Black Horse and a Cherry Tree" by K T Tunstall -- I guess, tempo-wise, it's not a bad song to wake up to. I guess it could work as a sort of 'new beginning' type of song.

FIRST DAY OF SCHOOL: "Stranglehold" by Ted Nugent -- Um, okay. I'll let my commentators (hi Nicky) try and figure this one out.

FALLING IN LOVE: "Saint Simon" by The Shins -- Wait, things don't make sense? That doesn't have anything to do with falling in love, right? You can check out the lyrics here.

FIGHT SONG: "Bad Habit" by The Offspring -- Any song with the lyric "You stupid dumbshit goddamn motherfucker" can't be a bad fight song, right? But it would have made a better driving song.

BREAKING UP: "Marseillaise" by Edith Piaf -- Wow. Just wow. Apparently, while we're breaking up, I'll be watering the fields with impure blood. What can I say, I'm just romantic like that?

PROM: "Einstein on the Beach" by Counting Crows -- This is, ironically, actually appropriate.

LIFE: "Celebrity Skin" by Hole -- Again, I have no idea what this says about me. Either that I have Hole on my playlist, or that this song is supposed to represent my life. Just don't take the line about making me over too seriously

MENTAL BREAKDOWN: "Alleluia" by Leonard Cohen -- Again, oddly appropriate. What else are you going to do when someone takes your throne and cuts your hair, but have a mental breakdown? (And then tear down a temple on a bunch of Philistines, but that's not actually in the song).

DRIVING: "Full of Grace" by Sarah McLachlan -- I don't know how many of you have seen the second season of Buffy, but this actually makes a great driving song, if you're driving away from something, at least.

FLASHBACK: "Somebody Told Me" by The Killers -- I'm really not sure what kind of flashback this song would fit with. Probably some flashback from when I'm at my 10 year reunion, thinking back to prom. Or maybe as I'm driving away.

WEDDING: "Lake of Fire" by Nirvana -- This is just wrong. No wedding song should have the line "Go to a lake of fire and fry". Though, I guess some people think of marriage as hell, so maybe it's more appropriate than I thought at first.

BIRTH OF CHILD: "I'll Be There" by Escape Club -- Well, from the title it seems to make sense. But this is kind of a wierd song. The song implies that the 'I'll be there' is I'll be there in your thoughts, and you'll be in mine, but not actually present. So the kid would have a sort of 'Cat's Cradle' childhood.

FINAL BATTLE: "My Will" by Dream -- Well, this only works if my final battle is a stylized anime battle, and I have a big sword. Which I guess isn't all bad. It's the first ending theme to the anime series Inuyasha, if you were wondering. It's a bit slow and pop to be a good fight song, though.

DEATH SCENE: "Low" by Foo Fighters -- This isn't too bad. It's got lines like "Hey you / Are you in there / I'm stuck outside you, ooh," which kinda works as long as you don't think about it too hard. It's probably best to think of this coming at the end of the final fight, as my friends are getting shot down, and then at the end, they finally get me too.

FUNERAL SONG: "I Drink Alone" by George Thorogood. Well, I suppose this had to come up at some point, but if I was going to have a drinking song as my funeral song, I would have rather had 'Empty Chairs at Empty Tables'. Maybe it makes more sense if you picture me in heaven with my buddies Beam and Daniels, watching my funeral.

END CREDITS: "Empty Chairs at Empty Tables" from Les Miserables. I swear, I didn't know this was coming up when I wrote the previous comment. So, I guess after the funeral, there's a fade-away to my best friend drinking alone at the Delmar Lounge/Gangrenous Foot/wherever.

Well, if nothing else, I hope that list of songs gives credence to my claim to like all different sorts of music, if nothing else.

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Overheard at the Law School

Alternate Living Arrangements for Justices:

R: Man, Scalia would totally be right if he lived in a vacuum.
H: I wish Scalia lived in a vacuum.

Arr!
In a discussion of bilging in Puzzle Pirates
C: I've never gotten crabs.
N: They just make it harder.

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

When is a sandwich not a sandwich?

In what has to be one of the most bizarre rulings I've seen a judge make, a judge in Worchester, Mass. ruled that a burrito is not a sandwich. Apparently Panera was trying to prevent a Qdoba from moving into a mall where they had a store. They had a contract with the mall preventing them from leasing space to another sandwich shop. But, presumably, since a burrito is not a sandwich, Qdoba wins and gets the mall space. Best part of the story: the judge called on a chef and a former high-ranking federal agricultural official to make this decision. Isn't that a bit overkill? I mean, couldn't he have just stuck with Webster's?

Hat tip: discourse.net
Story at: Yahoo! news

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

Of Today's South Park

Wait, you mean that even without religion, people still get into wars? Who'd have thought?