This article briefly touches on two unrelated items. I lumped them into one article as they are each small.
First, I give an argument in favor of a strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. Second, I give an argument against Islam.
7 Steps to Strict Interpretation
- Humans cannot conceive of an infinite list of heterogeneous items.
- Humans cannot intend anything they cannot conceive of.
- The Constitution may be interpreted as giving only defined powers or giving only defined restrictions.
- If the Constitution gives only defined restrictions then it has an infinite list of heterogeneous powers.
- A contract should be interpreted as meaning that which it was intended to mean, or else it is not valid.
- Therefore (1, 2, 3, and 4): The Constitution was intended to mean a list of specified powers.
- Therefore (5 and 6): The Constitution should be interpreted strictly, or else it is not valid. For these purposes, a strict interpretation is one which assumes enumerated powers and an originalist meaning of the Constitution.
A Simple Argument Against Islam
- Islam condones lying in the forms of Taqiyya, Kitman, and Hiyal.
- If the religion condones lying, then both the creator of the religion and also the followers condone lying.
- Therefore, the expected truth value of Islam and of anything spoken by a Muslim is less than the average expected truth value of a human statement.