Philosophical Thought
Right now I am in Philosophy 497R, a Senior Seminar class. It is definitely the most challenging and time consuming class I have ever taken. It is also very rewarding and I have learned a lot. The topic we are studying is "justice". While I haven't determined which theory of justice I agree with, I have started to develop ideas and opinions on the subject and I try to comment at least once every class period. But, I have never understood politics and I honestly have a hard time internalizing the whole idea of it.
Right now I am reading a court case for class tomorrow. And I am sorry, but with sentences like this:
"We may assume for present purposes that no pronouncement of a legislature can forestall attack upon the constitutionality of the prohibition which it enacts by applying opprobrious epithets to the prohibited act, and that a statute would deny due process which precluded the disproof in judicial proceedings of all facts which would show or tend to show that a statute depriving the suitor of life, liberty or property had a rational basis."
how can I honestly follow what this guy is saying? So I probably have a slight case of ADD and I get distracted easily and the primary sources we read are not easy to understand, so it takes me hours to get through this stuff! My roommates just discovered that I was writing a blog about a sentence, I love them <3. I will now proceed with my reading, picking back up at the long confusing sentence where I left off. I feel like I should say, "thanks" so... Thank you for your time. (This just got really weird) Oh, and Kaylee just threw a grape to me and I caught it with my mouth. Awesome.
Right now I am reading a court case for class tomorrow. And I am sorry, but with sentences like this:
"We may assume for present purposes that no pronouncement of a legislature can forestall attack upon the constitutionality of the prohibition which it enacts by applying opprobrious epithets to the prohibited act, and that a statute would deny due process which precluded the disproof in judicial proceedings of all facts which would show or tend to show that a statute depriving the suitor of life, liberty or property had a rational basis."
how can I honestly follow what this guy is saying? So I probably have a slight case of ADD and I get distracted easily and the primary sources we read are not easy to understand, so it takes me hours to get through this stuff! My roommates just discovered that I was writing a blog about a sentence, I love them <3. I will now proceed with my reading, picking back up at the long confusing sentence where I left off. I feel like I should say, "thanks" so... Thank you for your time. (This just got really weird) Oh, and Kaylee just threw a grape to me and I caught it with my mouth. Awesome.
I love you! You are my child in SO many ways! Perhaps the Williams and the Ferrins were neighbors in heaven :)
ReplyDeleteThose kinds of sentences make me a bit nutsy - perhaps we should diagram it first!
Good luck!
XOXOXO