Deem: Difference between revisions

17 bytes added ,  20 July 2020
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{a|g|[[File:Eagle over canyon.jpg|450px|thumb|center|A [[legal eagle]] soars over the magnificent legacy of the River Pedantry, yesterday.]]
{{a|g|[[File:eagle over grand canyon.jpg|450px|thumb|center|A [[legal eagle]] soars over the magnificent legacy of the River Pedantry, yesterday.]]
}}To [[deem]] is the anti-[[Bob Cunis|Cunis]]; it is to treat one thing ''as'' the other. It enfolds all a [[legal eagle]]’s intents and every one of her purposes.
}}To [[deem]] is the anti-[[Bob Cunis|Cunis]]; it is to treat one thing ''as'' the other. It enfolds all a [[legal eagle]]’s intents and every one of her purposes.


Line 12: Line 12:
For where to “[[amend]]” is to assert the ''identity'' — the continuing legal existence, even — of a unitary something that is in a way ''[[Change|changed]]'' over a period of time, to “[[deem]]” is to assert the momentary ''non''-identity of something that, in every legally material way, has not. It is to take Theseus’ ship to a whole other realm of [[Ontology|ontological]] [[redundancy]].  
For where to “[[amend]]” is to assert the ''identity'' — the continuing legal existence, even — of a unitary something that is in a way ''[[Change|changed]]'' over a period of time, to “[[deem]]” is to assert the momentary ''non''-identity of something that, in every legally material way, has not. It is to take Theseus’ ship to a whole other realm of [[Ontology|ontological]] [[redundancy]].  


Why do we [[legal eagles]] talk in such convoluted ways? Because it was ever so. So much water has passed before us that it has beconme not how we ''sepak'' but how we ''think''. These are our gods and monsters. This is the fabric from which our legal world is woven. This essential [[Subjunctive|subjunctivity]]; this fixation with a hypothetical state of being one ''would be in'' were it not for the inconvenient state one actually ''is in'', is foundational to the [[legal eagle]]’s torturous psyche.  
Why do we [[legal eagles]] talk in such convoluted ways? Because it was ever so. So much water has passed before us that it has become not how we ''speak'' but how we ''think''. These are our gods and monsters. This is the fabric from which our legal world is woven. This essential [[Subjunctive|subjunctivity]]; this fixation with a [[hypothetical]] state of being one ''would be in'' were it not for the inconvenient state one actually ''is in'', is foundational to the [[legal eagle]]’s torturous psyche.  


The [[noun]] form of deem; the act of ''deeming'' something, is “demption”.
The [[noun]] form of deem; the act of ''deeming'' something, is “demption”.
Line 20: Line 20:
*[[Fungible]]
*[[Fungible]]
*[[Bob Cunis]]
*[[Bob Cunis]]
{{ref}}