Александр Курбатов (редактор отдела «Бывший СССР»)
I spent some time optimising it.
，推荐阅读safew获取更多信息
He knows that many critics and academics will take issue with his complete dismissal of historical consciousness and sociopolitical context: “The freedom to apprehend aesthetic value may rise from class conflict, but the value is not identical with the freedom,” he says. “There is always guilt in achieved individuality; it is a version of the guilt of being a survivor and is not productive of aesthetic value.” In these passages, Bloom’s arguments against the legacy of late-twentieth-century literary study are the most lucid they would ever be:
But this claim relies on a false dichotomy. The intellectual pressure to articulate the relationship between tort law’s legal structures and its underlying moral principles is not simply an alien demand imposed upon pragmatic common law judges by legal theorists with a taste for overly nice philosophical abstraction. It is a pressure that arises from within the enterprise of principled and consistent common law adjudication (and academic reflection on it), for such adjudication unavoidably encounters the evident normative tensions between different planks of tort doctrine — such as the tension between the rule in Palsgraf and the doctrine of transferred intent, or the tension between the conditions under which negligence and battery (respectively) enable plaintiffs to recover for harm that is justifiably inflicted.
122B-A10B - KLD benchmarks (lower is better)