Them Dumb Bones

In Judaism, there is a tradition known as “building a fence around the law.” As the page linked in that last sentence indicates, it derives from a verse in the Tanakh — the Hebrew scriptures known to Christians as “the Old Testament” — specifically from Leviticus 18:30.

Leviticus, as you may know, is a favored book of the Republican Party because it tells them not to tolerate homosexuals and to avoid eating shrimp or lobster at fundraisers.  According to them one of those rules is absolutely applicable to the modern world.

But I’m not really going to get into politics here: this post is about the negative aspects of building fences and how this can as easily choke the law and divorce it from the intent behind it as it can protect it. [Read more...]

Seeing What We Want to See

Concerning the difficulty of researching and writing historical ethnographies, the anthropologist Gananath Obeyesekere, states:

[I]t ought to make us self-conscious about our vulnerability.  And the fact that we are not on very solid ground also ought to make us ethically and politically sensitive when we write about other cultures.  In historical ethnography, it should alert us to several acute methodological problems when we deal with archival and documentary material written before modern ethnography even got off the ground.  …  “Any ontology we use to ground the human sciences must ultimately be based on ‘faith’ since any ontology of even minimal significance must derive from a variety of sources, including the scholar’s religious and cultural heritage; and any ontology that we employ can never be final since the very historicity of our being prevents that.”  (Gananath Obeyesekere,The Apotheosis of Captain Cook: European Mythmaking in the Pacific (1997) 200.)

Well, what’s that got to do with criminal law?

[Read more...]