Studying The Trivium cont, Ch.2C: Why Do You Want to Learn Logic? w/ Sister Miriam Joseph, Ph.D.
The Republican ProfessorShow Notes
Part 4.
We're continuing our discussion of The Trivium today in conversation with Sister Miriam Joseph, Ph.D., who joins us through her writing teaching ministry in "The Trivium: The Liberal Arts of Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric" originally published in 1937. We're discussing the first section of her second chapter. That chapter is called The Nature and Function of Language. We start our discussion on the top of p. 15 where we left off 1 Sept 2026, and we top of p. 22 today.
We'd like to thank Sister Miriam Joseph for writing this and we'd like to thank Paul Dry Books 2002 for making this particular edition available to readers (edited by Marguerite McGlinn).
We're doing a fair use and transformative reading, and would encourage you to go out and get yourself a physical copy of this book. Whether used or new, or even a different edition, if you can find it, get the book, a physical copy you can hold in your hand, and follow along with the discussion.
The Republican Professor is a pro-Trivium-done-right podcast.
The Republican Professor is produced and hosted by Dr. Lucas J. Mather, Ph.D.
More from The Republican Professor
This is Part 13 in a series celebrating the 40th Anniversary of Harvard University Press' 1985 publication of Richard A. Epstein's "Takings: Private Property and the Power of Eminent Domain."
Part 13 of 13 -- the last one on Bostock, baby ! Update: Richard A. Epstein said about 7 months ago on Law Talk with John Yoo (Feb 2026) in the first 20 minutes of the Feb 2026 episode that there is evidence Gorsuch may have changed his mind on Bostock. Well, it's plausible and if so, it's related to the stuff we're saying here.
We continue to cover Justice Gorsuch's Concurring Opinion for the Court today Episode 19 of this deep dive on Chevron deference. This is the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) decision that overruled Chevron (1984), Justice Gorsuch's concurring Opinion for the Court. We go from Gorshuch's p. 15 II.B.1 through his B.2 and B.3, ending at C in the middle of p. 26 Gorsuch's concurrence slip opinion. If you want to follow along, there's a link below.
Part 2: The analogy of abortion with slavery has been used by both sides of the debate, pro-life and pro-choice. A helpful way to see which side is more likely using the analogy more correctly is to dig into a comparison between the key Supreme Court decisions involved, and to make an analogy based upon that work. Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) was the key pro-slavery decision opposed by Republicans. Roe v. Wade (1973) was the key abortion decision along with its companion decision published the same day, Doe v. Bolton (1973), both opposed by Republicans. The 2A connection is with the slavery issue, for slavery was abolished when Republicans put guns into the hands of black people. The Democrats have been trying to pry guns out of the hands of black people ever since (see, most recently, Otis McDonald's hands, which Republicans protected in 2010, while Democrats opposed and tried to take the gun out of his hand).
The analogy of abortion with slavery has been used by both sides of the debate, pro-life and pro-choice. A helpful way to see which side is more likely using the analogy more correctly is to dig into a comparison between the key Supreme Court decisions involved, and to make an analogy based upon that work. Dred Scott v. Sanford (1857) was the key pro-slavery decision opposed by Republicans. Roe v. Wade (1973) was the key abortion decision along with its companion decision published the same day, Doe v. Bolton (1973), both opposed by Republicans. The 2A connection is with the slavery issue, for slavery was abolished when Republicans put guns into the hands of black people. The Democrats have been trying to pry guns out of the hands of black people ever since (see, most recently, Otis McDonald's hands, which Republicans protected in 2010, while Democrats opposed and tried to take the gun out of his hand).