I was just at lunch, and was lucky enough to have a chatty waiter. Out of the blue, the waiter asked me whether I knew of a good way to get out of jury duty. I responded that I did not. He then went on at some length about all the ways in which he has, over the years, tried to avoid serving as a juror. Some of these measures seemed to me quite extreme. So I asked him the following question:
"I'm curious: Let's say you're unlucky enough to be accused of a serious crime that you did not commit and are brought to stand trial. Would you want to be tried before a jury of your peers or not?"
He replied quickly and confidently: "Of course."
So I responded: "Is it possible that the fact that you feel entitled to a trial by jury entails that you have a responsibility to serve as a juror if called?"
His reply: "Don't judge me. I'll get your check."
The End.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
"Don't judge me" is one of the strangest things people say. Sometimes there's a reasonable point- "don't judge my moral worth because of my fashion sense" or something like that. But the general "don't judge me" point is very weird. "Why the hell not?" I want to say.
How about suggesting he commits a felony. I assume convicted criminals aren't eligible for jury service...
Spiros:
Doesn't it seem that the problem isn't the idea of public philosophy (as you suggest it is: "public philosophy and other dumb ideas"). Isn't the problem just that you act like a jerk in these situations?
Anony 7:32,
If Spiros is a jerk, at least he's a jerk for justice. The waiter is just a jerk.
spiros is so morally righteous about the legal system. seems absurd.
A good way to get out of jury duty is to claim that you're a professional philosopher. And that you do ethics. And that you're a deontologist. When you explain what that means, you're off the hook.
Imipolex,
What good does it do for Spiros to act this way with a waiter or with the woman mentioned in this earlier post?
Anon 7:32, it's not clear what you're asking after with your question, "What good does it do for Spiros to act this way..."
What good are you looking for? That of helping someone come to know himself (isn't "don't judge me" already a concession that he's judged himself accordingly?). Maybe that of standing up, even passingly, for the rights of the accused, or the proper functioning of the legal system. Perhaps just asking for consistency. There are more, but because you've probably stopped reading by now (you can't stand jerks who correct others), it's not worth continuing.
Now, instead of slapping down doofuses, we should ask the question: in this failure of public philosophy, was it the public that failed or the philosophy?
Spiros, I'll just say that you are not a jerk, and the people that you are educating (in the public realm) should be pointed out as fools.
Keep on doing the good work.
Both lawyers and religious leaders (clergy, etc.) can get out of jury duty...as can former convicts: kudos to Ben for noting this already.
And on the waiter: judge him.
Anonymous, you are tone deaf. You miss the self-mocking edge that Spiros's posts on public philosophy always have. Btw, if you think that someone is a jerk if they go around judging others, what does that make you?
There is no plausible consequentialist justification of public philosophy if the good consequences are supposed to be benefits received by the public. The idea that the waiter has been educated by this little encounter is absurd and, if it were said by Spiros, self-aggrandizing. We aren't going to educate the public. As the waiter's closing line shows, they are beyond help.
If there is a consequentialist justification for public philosophy it must be in terms of the benefits to us. These kinds of episodes can be fun and, in a weird way, philosophically enlightening. Sometimes demonstrating what's wrong with really really stupid ideas can reveal something interesting (to us not them of course). It can also be a good way to knock the rust off the more dormant neurons and, when you have doubts about whether studying philosophy was the right move, talking to people like that will convince you that it was.
On the other hand, public philosophy can be frustrating, depressing and it will almost always prevent you from getting laid. (But occasionally, ..)
Whether there's a good consequentialist justification for public philosophy in terms of benefits to us is harder to say. But I lean towards a no.
Me, I favor a deontological justification for public philosophy. This is what we are and this is what we do. Let waiters be judged though the heavens fall.
On a supposed right: On the other hand, public philosophy can be frustrating, depressing and it will almost always prevent you from getting laid.
THAT explains it. Damn, now I'm depressed. Call me "271" today.
Brooks: And on the waiter: judge him.
Priceless!
Krinos: What good are you looking for? That of helping someone come to know himself (isn't "don't judge me" already a concession that he's judged himself accordingly?)
If so much good has come of Spiros' interaction with the waiter, why is public philosophy a dumb idea (as Spiros claims), and why is Spiros' interaction with the waiter a "failure of public philosophy" (as you called it at 11:25)?
Krinos: you can't stand jerks who correct others
No, I don't mind such jerks. In fact, I like myself quite a bit.
My point is just that Spiros' interaction with the waiter and with the woman at the coffee shop seem like poor tests of the value of public philosophy. I hope Anonymous 10:29 is right that Spiros doesn't mean for them to be decent tests. If Spiros gives a shit at all about making some headway with a person such as the waiter or the coffee-shop woman, aren't there subtler and more clever means of sucking them into substantive reflection than the means Spiros would employ? Of course, maybe Spiro doesn't give a shit at all. But in that case, he's hardly in position to disparage public philosophy.
Krinos: was it the public that failed or the philosophy?
My question was unclear? I wonder what the hell you mean by this.
Me: Of course, maybe Spiros doesn't give a shit at all. But in that case, he's hardly in position to disparage public philosophy.
I.e., if Spiros didn't even try to make headway with those people, then it would make little sense for him to say that public philosophy has failed his tests.
Anon 7:32, Two things.
First,you write:
"Krinos: was it the public that failed or the philosophy?
My question was unclear? I wonder what the hell you mean by this."
Clarification: was the explanation for the failure that the public audience for the philosophy failed to do philosophy or that the philosophy proposed was a failure.
Really, Anony, for someone who presumes to be critical and all, you don't try very hard. Or perhaps you try hard not to understand and put the onus of intellectual work on others.
Second, on the issue of failure of public philosophy: non-philosophical successes can come out of philosophical failures. So our waiter can realize something about himself and even feel ashamed ("don't judge me" implicates that he realizes that there's something to judge), but his reaction is incurious and preemptively breaks off the conversation. So it's failed philosophy, but it does have other goods that come of it.
Wow. Someone should run some kind of regression on whether someone posts anonymous comments on a blog and whether that person displays a sense of humor at all. It's not looking good for the anon commenters here.
Tinnitus, common and hard to medically detect and interferes with the responsibilities of a juror
AGM:
Good point.
Spiros is my hero. He saw someone who asked for advice on how to violate the implied social contract and essentially told him not to. Maybe doing so is 'socially unacceptable' to some people, but I think he's dead on here. Why do we tolerate such flagrantly selfish anti-social attitudes as the waiter's?
I don't what to say because when I'm going to eat and having an spectacular lunch I don't like to talk with the waiter, also I think that waiter was saying only lies.m10m
This is really interesting that the waiter doing all those questions, I think we have to respect waiters but it was enough.
Thanks for the nice blog. It was very useful for me. Keep sharing such ideas in the future as well. This was actually what I was looking for, and I am glad to came here! Thanks for sharing the such information with us.
sounds kindof good if you think of it
People usually aren't in kind of dilemma so probably you won't get the smartest answers that you can get.
Post a Comment