Ciceronian Review

No To Local Control

There was a remarkable press release published Tuesday, noted I think by a commentator below.  The Pew Trust published the results of a survey showing a rather large portion of the American public believes that creationism should be taught in public schools (or any schools).  It is a might depressing.  Deepened by the fact that about 40% beleive in creationsim.  The gloom is enhanced by this other story from yesterday's news, showing that a remarkably large number of people -- a majority in fact -- don't understand the relevant concepts.

No Respect

This is sacreligious. 

Unless the fruit is bad. 

Just Say No

Every year brings another set of collected works of some poet or other.  Everybody has favorites, either loved or hated.  Like books about baseball, or Shakespeare, there really should be a quota for issuing collected works of anyone.  There are very few writers whose works really deserve to be collected, or whose works reward assembly into such a volume.  In poetry, there are very very few.  Take, for example, James Wright (an edition of whose letters has just come out).  I like Wright very much, and have copies of almost all of his works, including the first collected works.  But it is full of second rate works, poems whose disappearance would not be a loss.  A.R. Ammons, another very good poet, whose collected poems is available.  It would be very difficult to get through the collected poems.  The books cannot be justified as commercial publications I think.  (It would be very weird if so, as it would entail a significantly larger market for the collected poems than for the individual volumes, which, while not impossible is strikingly counter-intuitive.)  Is it just completeness or a hope for academic sales?  Surely there are not enough courses on the works of James Wright to support the endeavor.  Selected works is another story, and happier I think.

Inappropriate?

It is barely news that Pat Robertson advocates more killing.   The man advocates the murder of those he disapproves of with disturbing frequency, particularly as US politicians meet with him regularly.  But here is the most disturbing piece of the story, what the United States government has to say:

''We do not share his view, and his comments are inappropriate,'' spokesman Sean McCormack said.

Global war against terrorism?  Calls on clerics to denounce terrorism and violence?  Condemnation of incitement to murder?  No, we get the clarion condemnation: "his comments are inappropriate."   

Wonder how his fellow clerics are reacting.

Courtesy

This decision by the Utah Supreme Court is odd, but not because of what it says about the law.  What is odd is how the Court refers to the plaintiff -- by his first name.  I cannot recall another case in which an appellate court chose to refer to parties by their first names.  It is not an explanation that the case involves a parent and child -- there are plenty of those, and it is not the norm to talk about Jake and Bill, or Melinda and Lucretia.  So why not use Afridi?

Update:
I have looked at some decisions over the last year, and some recent decisions.  It turns out I am wrong -- the Utah Supreme Court uses litigants' first names with regularity.  So nothing in that complaint, now withdrawn.  (Yes, I do  find it discourteous, but I am no judge.)

Filler

The NYT is running a series of long articles on "intelligent design."  Sunday's article concerned the political accomplishment of the Discovery Institute.  Today presented a rather soft analysis of what "intelligent design" arguments are. I say soft because the story gave full space to the "intelligent design" accounts with relatively short and highly abstract responses from evolutionary theorists.  The critiques could have been sharper and more directly engaged.  There was no need for such abstractness in the responses.  For example, when "intelligent designers" talk about mouse trap, why go on about the probable this and that, and some piece of evidence over there.  The response can be more direct; the argument is stupid.  It requires a willful blindness (intended) to suppose that there is only blindness and perfect sight, or that there is only clotting or hemophilia.  But then again, it is a newspaper.

In the letters in the current issue of TLS there are some responses to Fodor's hilarious discussion of Evolutionary Psychology.  (The letters seem to be along the lines of, 'well, yes, there is no research program and most of what is published under the name in inane, but still there is something I think interesting about the very vague idea.')  In any event, there is this a discussion about what it is that goes extinct, suggesting that it is genes that become extinct.  I wonder.  That seems wrong to me, but I am not sufficiently sure of the biology to venture a view.

Pills Please

A curious day.  In the Vioxx trial, the jury came back with about $24 million in damages for emotional distress.  Maybe I am tainted by too much defense work, but this seems an absurd verdict.  I cannot see how the plaintiff could possibly have had such emotional distress damages.  Most parents who lose children get far less, and a child's death surely is more painful than the death of a 60 year-old.  To me it appears that the jury chose the emotional damages number after setting the punitive damages number.  But then I was not at the trial and have not seen the evidence.  Maybe, possibly, etc.  But I doubt it.

Even with a cap on punitives, this is a great deal of money.  I wonder why the jury is not informed of the cap.  After a discussion with the spouse, we could not come to an agreement.  Or rather, agreed that it was all speculation on eminently testable (and untested) hypotheses.  Rather like Bainbridge on tipping.

A Change in Tide

Somebody is dancing today.

Somebody else is listening to dirges. 

Tony's Tome

Over the weekend I finished The Families Who Built Rome.  I recommend the book.  It is delightful mix of history and walking tours, built around various undertakings of some of the great families of Renaissance Rome.  It was a pleasant surprise to realize I had visited a significant portion of the locations and seen a significant portion of the art already.  It was even more fun to recognize various places visited with the author.  Rome is a wonderful place, at least for vacationers like me.  And it is helpful for me to be reminded of some of the ways in which the presence of the city is only the latest configuration.  The book is also quite nice on a central fact which I easily forget -- the degree to which the gorgeous marbles and statuary of the renaissance building -- like St. Peter's -- is the result of old time looting.  What would the Pantheon be if its bronze were returned?  Well, something for a computer generated tour I suppose.

Snidely Whiplash's Sister

The sort of crime every academic wishes he or she was the victim of: a stolen copy of a dissertation.  For almost all, it would be a major victory to get someone, anyone not required by university rules or loyalty, to voluntarily read a copy of one's dissertation.  But for someone to care enough to steal a copy. . . . well, that is a success; or is it an art project?

No Volokh today.