legalist

Even a legalist would need to concede that the law hasn't been followed in the first place.

There aren't enough executions for this to be an issue and a person's life shouldn't depend on legalist bureaucrats.

As an aside the legalist argues that humans are evil, fickle and morally corrupt by default and need strict laws.

Maybe hit up the legalist for funding and or check with an attorney who does financial class action in San Francisco.

This essay advances, but does not really analyze, the legalist argument against generative AI.

Ultimately relying on centralized trust actors, and using aggressive legalist pursuit to enforce compliance, is 100% against the spirit Im looking for.

It has to be understood that the regime was highly academic and legalist.

You're thinking about this from a legalist perspective but those days are gone.

Edit: PayToTrain looks like a non-disclosed ad and/or project from legalist.

Confucian and legalist scholars recognized that statecraft was fundamentally a management problem, and they included a lot of wisdom about that sort of thing in their writings.

Is Startrek civilization more legalist than ethic?

You probably lost those words when Qin Shi Huang decided to burn all the (non-legalist) books and bury all the scholars [1]...but there is always YinYang (also Taoism), which at least emphasizes contrasts.

However, Xunzi is uncommonly anti-individualistic even by Confucian standards, and influenced the tyrannic "legalist" tradition of Chinese state theory.

The bullshit our "enlightented" legalist class manages to pull off is legendary.

And I don’t mean “owns” from a legalist perspective, I mean “owns” as in the hacker meaning, like “owning” the box.

Anyway, the political philosophy that survived and emerged "victorious" during the turbulent periods was the legalist school of thought, which was like Lao Tzu and Confucius married and had a child together.