As a rebuttal to my blog post about the viability of RC, Stephen raised a potent problem; i.e. a Radical Constructivist encounters difficulties when participating in civil duties that are tied, explicitly, to notions of truth and fact(e.g. a jury). Could a Radical Constructivist, he asks, participate in our legal system?
You are right to focus on the problem of the other. If we are limited to our own experiences how are we to render a verdict about the truth of another's action? But again, the notion of fitting, is the manner in which the RC will defend this.
Elisha was chosen for a jury; she even scoffed when the judge asked them to deliberate while considering the facts of the case. She understands the unenlightened nature of our legal system, but her previous experiences seem to comfort her and allow her to perform, to the best of her ability, the charge given. But how is that so? How can she rely on testimony...etc...It is viable, per her previous experiences, that persons of authority relay their experiences as they are viable to them. She formulates her opinion on whether or not Amanda stole the drugs (crime in question) from the viability of her own experiences; i.e. the reliability, though not perfect, of the experiences of others. She determines whether or not the viability that Amanda stole them is high enough to recommend punishment.
This is one possible avenue of defense for the RCist. As a realist, I have my doubts, and so my question is this: does that hypothetical actually cohere with RC?
Chaire Iakobe, I have replied to your post.
ReplyDelete