Comments on The Smoldering Core of the Criminal LawTypePad2010-11-11T16:57:54ZRick Garnetthttps://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/tag:typepad.com,2003:https://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2010/11/the-smoldering-core-of-the-criminal-law/comments/atom.xml/Marc DeGirolami commented on 'The Smoldering Core of the Criminal Law'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e20133f5c4e13a970b2010-11-11T20:01:35Z2010-11-11T20:01:35ZMarc DeGirolamiRob, thanks for the kind word. You may be right, and my view is that if the core is part...<p>Rob, thanks for the kind word. You may be right, and my view is that if the core is part of what is real about criminality -- indeed, what may in some sense be uniquely true about it -- then legal scholars ought to engage more deeply with it as they conceive their theories of punishment, crime, justification, and so on. </p>
<p>The core is relevant because it is real, and so should be a subject of scholarly attention and reflection. It needs exploration, understanding, approached by scholars in something like the mood of the obverse of empathy. But for reasons up above, I don't think that's been the case (generally speaking -- Kleinfeld's piece is a nice exception, and he cites some others): deep thinkers in criminal law have found the subject awkward, and have largely stayed away. </p>
<p>I'm far less sanguine on the question of whether we, as legal academics, ought to be in the business of anything as grand as 'getting past' evil, though I recognize that many academics do view their role as emancipatory, especially when the subject is a problematic emotion like disgust, hatred, or fear.</p>
<p>I should also say that I remember reading John Kekes's 'Facing Evil' a while ago, and remember thinking that it was a strong example of interesting contemporary theorizing (though not in criminal law) about evil. <br />
</p>rob vischer commented on 'The Smoldering Core of the Criminal Law'tag:typepad.com,2003:6a00d834515a9a69e20133f5c4c1a4970b2010-11-11T19:35:27Z2010-11-11T19:35:27Zrob vischerGreat post. I'm not sure if you can address the failure of legal academics to address the core without addressing...<p>Great post. I'm not sure if you can address the failure of legal academics to address the core without addressing the question you try to bracket: whether the core should be avoided. If the void in legal scholarship is noteworthy, it seems that you have to articulate its relevance. Legal scholars are drawn to areas of dispute or fuzziness where their insights can bring resolution or clarity. We have to figure out what is disputed or fuzzy about the evil that pervades the Connecticut case, don't we?</p>