We can summarize semantic originalism as a slogan: The original public meaning of the constitution is the law and for that reason it should be respected and obeyed. The slogan recapitulates each of the claims made by semantic originalism, but it is potentially misleading because it does not clearly distinguish between the semantic claims made by the fixation and clause meaning theses, the legal claim made by the contribution thesis, and the normative claim made by the fidelity thesis.
A flawed but well-meaning thesis or an erroneousinterpretation stemming from an incorrect theory of some aspect of the sourceteachings then results. This happens perhaps because the student advocating acertain idea or viewpoint is practicing in isolation, has begun study from abackground or experiences that are an inappropriate basis (i.e., karate, kendo,sport fencing, etc.), or just possesses a certain outlook. The problem is thata thesis or interpretation cultivated in this manner ultimately ends up being
Meaning Thesis, as he wishes to deflate the meaning-relation to usage
Combining the manifestability thesis (that meaning must be publicly manifested), with the thesis that theories (in this case the assignment of meanings to sentences) are always underdetermined by the evidence (in this case the empirically manifested evidence), and with the contextuality thesis (that meaning attaches primarily to sentences and not words) results in a doctrine about the indeterminacy of the meaning of sub-sentential parts. This doctrine is also known as the inscrutability of reference. (It is important to distinguish the inscrutability thesis from Quine's thesis of the indeterminacy of translation(19). The latter concerns an indeterminacy in sentence-meaning. The inscrutability of reference concerns the meaning of the words in sentences.)