themilum: I haven't been following this thread up until now, but may I ask if you see Anu's discussion of his AWAD presentism - see below - as relevant to this discussion?
And, if Anu's discussion of "presentism" is relevant, is it possible that different high-minded thinkers could have an honest disagreement about something as fundamental as the issue before the U.S. Supreme Court because, although all of the Justices live in the same era, they are not necessarily breathing the same era?
I'm asking a question, not expressing an opinion, themilum, because I don't know enough about the case and the majority and dissenting opinions.
BTW you are a red state kinda guy, themilum, and you are multivastly outnumbered in this forum by blue state coastal types. In my opinion, this is good reason to give your views on subjects like this more latitude, rather than less, as a matter of principle, not politics.
How a majority treats a minority opinion on any given subject says more about the majority than its opinion on that subject.
presentism (PREZ-uhn-tiz-uhm) noun
Evaluating past events and people by present-day values.
[From English present, from Middle English, from Old French, from Latin praesent- (stem of praesens), from present participle of praeesse (to be present before others), from prae- (pre-) + esse (to be).]
Presentism is the application of current ideals and moral standards to interpret historical figures and their actions. For example, consider Mr. John Teacher who caned pupils in his 1889 class. A presentist would say that Mr. Teacher engaged in unacceptable violence against children while one with an opposing view would claim that since it was considered OK to hit children at the time, Mr. Teacher isn't to be blamed.
Absenteeism isn't an opposite of presentism. Rather, it refers to chronic absence, e.g. from work or school. Another sense of the term presentism is the idea that the prophesies of Scripture (especially of the Apocalypse) are now being fulfilled.
"In apocalyptic style, he (Jonathan Clark) says that presentism 'reaches back into the past to silence its message'." Stephen Howe; Fade to Blue; Independent (London, UK); Jul 12, 2003.
"Presentism is very often advanced in defense of America's founders. It is comforting to think that their generation, so distant in time from us, lived in a condition of moral ignorance, and thus innocence, regarding slavery. But that is not the case. Even Thomas Jefferson, some of whose
statements exhibit an almost demented racism, could see clearly that slavery utterly compromised the nation: 'I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that His justice cannot sleep forever.'" Henry Wiencek; Yale and the Price of Slavery; The New York Times; Aug 18, 2001.
per Anu
