Paper Title

-- By JessicaCohen - 22 Feb 2010

Section I

Subsection A

update: 2/25 A.M. I spoke with a few other students . But if you work for yourself, you'll never amount to anything. We'll have to work within institutions to get anything done (at least at first). When I think of "not pawning my license," I think of true economic and job freedom, i.e. I would choose my clients -- but you can't get much done without others. obvious? Moglen's "how to change the world" video - know what you want and know how to get it.

I once had a Reminded me of Randolph Bourne's Twilight of Idols. It is possible for pragmatists to become too bogged down in the "process" and lose sight of their overarching aims. Thought constantly in class, while reading Holmes/Cohen etc about the "consequences" of legal decisions, and grew exceedingly frustrating with Formalism. Constitutional Law was painful. But...how do we know the consequences are good? What do we ideally want to come out of a decision? The goodness/badness of each of these consequences needs to have some underlying set of values. Of course the same

In "Twilight of Idols," here's where Bourne comes in.

Pragmatists ended up supporting the war - Dewey? Lippman definitely did (a shame) - why is that? thought war promoted democracy. THE END WAS GOOD - but forgot about the horrors of war? Bourne says that pragmatism gives them a sense of optimism - this definitely happened in our class - and a sense of "control." maybe pragmatism works "against poetic vision, against concern for the quality of life as above the machinery of life."

they are "vague as to what kind of a society they want, or what kind of society America needs, but they are equipped with all the administrative attidutes and talents necessary to attain it"

you need to start with ultimate vision and work backwards, says Bourne. this matches eben's. if you want to be in "radiant cooperation with reality" then your success is "likely to be just that and no more...you never transcend anything"

NEED TO AFFECT INDIVUDALS --> quality of life. malcontents* - take instritutions lightly - "scarcely vaeiled" contempt - skeptical/malicious/ironical - because can't face American life faceon- it's too bad.

OTHER IDEA

Thurman Arnold - selection from "Symbols of Government" and the modern law firm Notes: What does it mean that Arnold, when headed anti-trust division, favored regulation of big business rather than the breaking up of monopolies?

"new social philosophy" - man "only works for his fellow man: - this tendency must be "curbed by law, ethics, and common sense - under "new creed" (default is ppl work for their fellow men) nervous about "well-meaning but impractical profit takers." sees this as dangerous in places like germany/russia/italy - people are fanatical about working for others.

new "abstract man" (one who works for other people besides himself) is arising out of "confusion instead of revolution" - gov't is now obligated to be charitable - when charity and govt used to be totally separate. grew out of the depression - by necessity gov't had to do good.

formerly - adam smith - said people wouldnt work as hard for a corporation as they would for themselves -- (b/c of self-interest) - now, great class of "technicians and experts" are concerned w/ disributing wealth/social "bookkeping. this whole idea of men working for others is a myth - "society is composed of all sorts of people and each individual ia whole cast of characters in himself" - "the value...of anmn [economic] philosophy can only be judged by the value of tghe governing class whose power it suports" - the hope of the "humanitarian economic creed" - is that the social values will be accepted and taken up by people.

social injustice/justice need each other to exist.

"THERE IS NO REASON WHY THE MEMBERS OF AN ENTIRE GOVERNING CLASS, BOTH GOOD AND BAD, SHOULD BE THROWN OUT OF PWOER SIMPLY B/C POPULAR IDEAS HAVE UNDERGONE A CHANGE" - but at the same time - prestige of entire groups are "tied up with a set of usages whose continuiance is regarded as a matter of fundamental principle" - this is how inept people are in power.

choice between "naive faith and principles" and "cynical denial of the validity of principle" is a force one-constitution can be uniting

ADULT PERSONALITY comes in - what is this? - tolerance - common sense - not always coldly rational - dont have to "swing" between clarity and total disillusionment

"so long as preconceived principles are considered more important than practical results, the practical alleviation of human distress and the distribution of available comforts will be paralyzed" - legal journalism in the NYT/new yorker/etc - robinson is not a hero - law school as trade school/columbia? - formalism/legal realism parallels in life/other fields --> thurman arnold --> myths keep society afloat (formalism uses micro-myths)

Subsub 1

Subsection B

Subsub 1

Subsub 2

Section II

Subsection A

Subsection B

---

You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" on the next line:

# * Set ALLOWTOPICVIEW = TWikiAdminGroup, JessicaCohen

Note: TWiki has strict formatting rules. Make sure you preserve the three spaces, asterisk, and extra space at the beginning of that line. If you wish to give access to any other users simply add them to the comma separated list