NDLI: Why the Debate Between Originalists and Evolutionists Rests on a Semantic Mistake

Content Provider	Springer Nature Link
Author	Collins, John M.
Copyright Year	2011
Abstract	I argue that the dispute between two leading theories of interpretation of legal texts, textual originalism and textual evolutionism, depends on the false presupposition that changes in the way a word is used necessarily require a change in the word’s meaning. Semantic externalism goes a long way towards reconciling these views by showing how a word’s semantic properties can be stable over time, even through vicissitudes of usage. I argue that temporal externalism can account for even more semantic stability, however. Temporal externalism is the theory that the content of an utterance at time t may be determined by developments in linguistic usage subsequent to t. If this semantic theory is correct, then the originalist and evolutionist positions effectively collapse. Originalism is correct in that the original meaning of the text is the meaning that is binding on jurists, but evolutionism is vindicated, as it is the current practices and standards that determine the meaning the text now has, and has always had. Objections to temporal externalism, and to its application to the interpretation of legal texts, are considered and addressed.
Starting Page	645
Ending Page	684
Page Count	40
File Format	PDF
ISSN	01675249
Journal	Law and Philosophy
Volume Number	30
Issue Number	6
e-ISSN	15730522
Language	English
Publisher	Springer Netherlands
Publisher Date	2011-06-16
Publisher Place	Dordrecht
Access Restriction	One Nation One Subscription (ONOS)
Subject Keyword	Theories of Law, Philosophy of Law, Legal History Philosophy of Law Social Sciences Political Science Logic
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Article
Subject	Philosophy Law

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Does Kelsen’s Notion of Legal Normativity Rest on a Mistake?

Justification, Rationality and Mistake: Mistake of Law is no Excuse? It Might be a Justificaton!

Why Retributivists Should Endorse Leniency in Punishment

Introductions

Abetting a Crime

Indirect Crimes

Rehabilitating Retributivism

A Dilemma for Protected Reasons

Justification Under Uncertainty

Why the Debate Between Originalists and Evolutionists Rests on a Semantic Mistake

Similar Documents

Does Kelsen’s Notion of Legal Normativity Rest on a Mistake?

Justification, Rationality and Mistake: Mistake of Law is no Excuse? It Might be a Justificaton!

Why Retributivists Should Endorse Leniency in Punishment

Introductions

Abetting a Crime

Indirect Crimes

Rehabilitating Retributivism

A Dilemma for Protected Reasons

Justification Under Uncertainty

Why the Debate Between Originalists and Evolutionists Rests on a Semantic Mistake