Item


Philosophy meets metaphor: the living tree and judicial review

Constitutional Charters or Bills of Rights are usually heralded as good things to have. They are generally applauded for the protections they are said to provide minorities and for their help in securing fundamental liberal democratic rights. But Charters are not without their detractors. Some Critics argue both that Charters cannot do the work their proponents claim they can, and that they are morally and politically objectionable. This evening, I would like to respond to a few of the Critics’ most serious objections by challenging the very conception of Charters and their aspirations they – and those who believe that Charters are good things to have, a group we’ll call ’the Advocates’ – seem to assume. The assumption shared by many Critics and Advocates is that a Charter purports to provide stable, fixed points of agreement on and pre-commitment to appropriate moral limits to government power. The Advocates argue not only that such stable fixed points are possible; they also contend that such points are morally and politically desirable as well

Universitat de Girona. Departament de Dret Privat

Author: Waluchow, Wilfrid J.
Date: 2009 January 30
Abstract: Constitutional Charters or Bills of Rights are usually heralded as good things to have. They are generally applauded for the protections they are said to provide minorities and for their help in securing fundamental liberal democratic rights. But Charters are not without their detractors. Some Critics argue both that Charters cannot do the work their proponents claim they can, and that they are morally and politically objectionable. This evening, I would like to respond to a few of the Critics’ most serious objections by challenging the very conception of Charters and their aspirations they – and those who believe that Charters are good things to have, a group we’ll call ’the Advocates’ – seem to assume. The assumption shared by many Critics and Advocates is that a Charter purports to provide stable, fixed points of agreement on and pre-commitment to appropriate moral limits to government power. The Advocates argue not only that such stable fixed points are possible; they also contend that such points are morally and politically desirable as well
Format: audio/mpeg
video/x-ms-wmv
video/H263
Citation: Waluchow, W.J. (2009). Philosophy meets metaphor: the living tree and judicial review. A ’Grup de recerca en Filosofia del Dret’. Girona: Universitat. [Consulta: 2 març 2009]. Disponible a: http://hdl.handle.net/10256.1/927
Document access: http://hdl.handle.net/10256.1/927
Language: eng
Publisher: Universitat de Girona. Departament de Dret Privat
Collection: Seminaris
Rights: Aquest document està subjecte a una llicència Creative Commons: Reconeixement - No comercial - Compartir igual (by-nc-sa)
Rights URI: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/es/deed.ca
Subject: Dret civil -- Congressos
Civil law -- Congresses
Dret -- Filosofia -- Congressos
Law -- Philosophy -- Congresses
Title: Philosophy meets metaphor: the living tree and judicial review
Type: info:eu-repo/semantics/lecture
Repository: DUGiMedia

Subjects

Authors