(35) I remain neutral about whether the favoring relation can be accounted for in terms of the notions of fittingness or Tightness, perhaps in combination with other notions such as evidence or explanation (Schroeter and Schroeter, "Reasons as Right-Makers"; Chappell, "Fittingness"; McHugh and Way, "Fittingness First"; Whiting, "Right in Some Respects"; Howard, "The Fundamentality
of Fit"), or whether favoring is instead aprimitive normative relation that explains which attitudes are fitting (for instance, Scanlon, What We Owe to Each Other; Schroeder, Slaves of the Passions; Parfit, On What Matters).
at 739 ("But the fundament of the right to privacy is not to be found in the supposed fundamentality
of what the law proscribes.
" Patient claims that the law violates the substantive component of the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause (2) Having recently studied up on substantive due process doctrine, I know that my disposition of this claim will depend on whether the "right" being asserted by the plaintiff qualifies as "fundamental" or "nonfundamental," (3) and I know how 1 should go about assessing a right's fundamentality
. Here too, however, I encounter a problem: I am not sure how to characterize the right whose fundamentality
I should assess.
We want to insist upon the distinction between norms and metanorms precisely to protect the fundamentality
of the individual in ethics against moral socialism.
of sexual orientation to personal identity).
and flexibility the right must exhibit under the
In sum, Nietzsche's view of reality denies the fundamentality
of individual entities.
For the fundamentality
and <<discovery of a new form of quantum fluid with fractional electric charge excitations>> H.L.
of these is suggested, for example, by how when someone contradicts himself in a court of law, he loses all credibility!
The essays were then processed applying corpus linguistics techniques, which allowed us to quantify term usage and distribution, lexical diversity and fundamentality
and also to reveal interpersonality traits based on an analysis of metadiscourse markers.
Note that the panel spent no time discussing the origin, scope, or fundamentality
of the right at issue, as modern "substantive due process" doctrine requires.