No Gay Wedding Cake For You

[_Res Ipsa]

It is a very complicated problem, so we need Justices with the critical thinking skills.

Unless I'm mistaken, Critical Reasoning is a required cognate course for majoring in criminal justice, as well as courses in various social sciences.

I think it's reasonable to view law school as an extended exercise in critical thinking.

[_Res Ipsa]

And, even if true, why are you confident that "smart" people will actually make the best legal decisions?

Maybe you should type slower for DoubtingThomas on this one and, to be sure, ask DoubtingThomas exactly how he thinks a "smart person" is defined?

Surely you mean faster than I'm typing for you, Subby.

But, yeah, that's an important question. The notion that we can find some universal indicator of intelligence (whether it be IQ, cranial volume, or the size of brain cells) and that "intelligence" translates into the best suited for a given role in society should, in my opinion, be consigned to the scrap heap. I have a fair amount of confidence in science as a process, but not because individual scientists are superior thinkers.

[_Res Ipsa]

But on the merits, Sub, what do you think of the opinion(s)? It seems to me that you predicted that the baker would win. Or am I confusing you with someone else?

[_DoubtingThomas]

And, even if true, why are you confident that "smart" people will actually make the best legal decisions? See, e.g., Michael Shermer's "Why People Believe Weird Things." How do the brains cells of Notorius RGB stack up against your average scientist?

Not all scientists are smart, but I think the average scientist is smarter than the average American.

Hey, spoiler alert...scientist does not automatically equal "smart people" or even "smarter" people...... so, yeah, you could easily be a scientist.

Dude, you suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect. How do you define smart? or smarter?

think it's reasonable to view law school as an extended exercise in critical thinking.

According to the economist, "One reason why people who learn more mathematics earn more is because doing maths makes you smarter and more productive. According to Clancy Blair, a professor of psychology at NYU, the act of performing mathematical calculations improves reasoning, problem-solving skills, behaviour, and the ability to self-regulate. These skills are associated with the pre-frontal cortex part of the brain, which continues to develop into your early 30s. "


I think we need scientific and mathematical minds in Congress and the Supreme Court. Law experts are trained in critical thinking, but I am not sure if they are trained to avoid mental gymnatics. Scientists are not perfect, but they do a lot of Math and are trained to avoid biases.

[_karl61]

The justices seem to me to be pretty deeply divided on that issue.

Because the brain of our supreme court justices is made of dog _____. We need scientists as supreme court justices.

Most of the Justices are extremely brilliant. I use to love to watch the confirmation hearings on C-Span, or better yet, when they were invited to give a speech to a certain group. I remember a few where I was just was just amazed.

I remember when I was in school there was a professor from UCLA named Katz who was a social psychologist who came to speak to our class. I was so impressed. He was young, likely in his early thirties and soft spoken. He seamlessly backed up his thoughts from ancient and current philosophy, art, literature, history and other subjects. He never hesitated; everything seemed to flow effortlessly. I was just amazed and in complete awe. He spoke for about 1 1/2 hours but it seemed like minutes. It was the same thing when I would hear Justices speaking to different groups on C-Span. They too would pull from all different subjects in their speech.

I remember listening to Justice Breyer at his confirmation hearings. I saw him do something that I never have seen before. When he was asked a question he would pause for about five seconds before he gave an answer. Most people answer immediately but he always paused and then responded and showed that his knowledge of the law was phenomenal. I think the ones that I was most impressed by in C-Span speeches to groups were Breyer and Kennedy. But I also remember being completely amazed listening to Justice Stevens hearings when he was being confirmed as Chief Justice. He also gave amazing answers, he wouldn't play into the committees games, trying to pigeon hole him into some future decision, or some decision that was presently before the court. To me he was brilliant and showed me why we allow at times five Justices to check the thoughts and votes of hundreds in the Legislature.

[Guest]

Most of the Justices are extremely brilliant. I use to love to watch the confirmation hearings on C-Span, or better yet, when they were invited to give a speech to a certain group. I remember a few where I was just was just amazed.

I don't doubt that our Supreme Court Justices are intelligent, some of them went to Harvard. I was mad when I said their brain was made of dog ____. But I still think scientists are generally more intelligent than judges and law experts. A scientist can easily learn a lot about law in a short period of time.

[_DoubtingThomas]

To put it simple, you don't have to be a genius to earn a degree in law. However, you need excellent cognitive skills to be a scientist.

[_DoubtingThomas]

And it is a sad fact that many judges and law experts are religious. Religion does influence their decision.

[_subgenius]

But on the merits, Sub, what do you think of the opinion(s)? It seems to me that you predicted that the baker would win. Or am I confusing you with someone else?

On its merits, Supreme Court was spot on...and yes my prediction was that the law would prevail. It was an insightful ruling based on the facts of the case...perhaps a bit narrow, but it was a just and fair ruling. All the uproar is easily seen as being from those who have yet to notice the details.
Meanwhile, that same-day ruling on abortion....

[_subgenius]

And it is a sad fact that many judges and law experts are religious. Religion does influence their decision.

CFR on both claims here...and while you are at it, please demonstrate that "many scientists" are NOT religious and NOT influenced in their decisions.

(and then get ye to a library or a community college for some much needed education).