| | |
|
FuckThisStupidRule 16 - 08 May 2009 - Main.AndrewCase
|
| | Fuck This Stupid Rule
Yesterday I spent what felt like an eternity - probably around 6 hours - trying to learn how to apply the Rule Against Perpetuities. Over and over, I thought I had it, but when I got to the next fact pattern I fell on my face again. Admittedly, math is not my strength, and my ability to imagine people dying at age 5 or procreating at age 80 just doesn't cut it. What's wrong with my brain, I thought, why can't I understand this? Then it happened: I realized that I don't have to learn the Rule Against Perpetuities! It's my education, damnit, and I don't give a shit about this stupid rule! I'd rather learn more about the tragedy of the commons or the public trust doctrine than wrap my brain around some legal fiction that all but a handful of jurisdictions have done away with. I think I just might write in my exam that I - along with the vast majority of US jurisdictions - think this is a stupid rule, and that perhaps it's time to strike it from the standard 1L Property syllabus. So what if I get a bad grade in Property? I feel empowered. | | | I think that this entire thread highlights the problems of understanding and receiving subtext through wiki/email/web conversation. Anja seemed mainly to be venting in the first post, saying that if learning something she didn't want to know meant getting a lower grade, she'll just live with a lower grade. I'm not sure how useful it is as a post, because it is the conclusion, rather than the beginning, of a discussion. | |
<
< | Will, and Molissa in more detail seem to be pointing out that whatever Anja thought about being "empowered," she will be objectively rated based on that grade, and whether she cares or not, others will, and it does us some good to remember that those people are out there. This is a useful tonic to keep in mind, but also probably precisely what Anja was choosing to ignore. Individual words and phrases ("bright idealism" etc) that would pass by in verbal conversation got latched onto because of the cold, impersonal style of the medium (where we think we are writing with all the tone of speaking, but the tone is not present on the page). It is much easier to believe we are being patronized than challenged, and much quicker and simpler to respond to. But it's an impulse that does not, I think, serve us. | >
> | Will and Molissa seem to be pointing out that whatever Anja thought about being "empowered," she will be objectively rated based on that grade, and whether she cares or not, others will, and it does us some good to remember that those people are out there. This is a useful tonic to keep in mind, but also probably precisely what Anja was choosing to ignore. Individual words and phrases ("bright idealism" etc) that would pass unnoticed in verbal conversation got latched onto because of the cold, impersonal style of the medium (where we think we are writing with all the tone of speaking, but the tone is not present on the page). It is much easier to believe we are being patronized than challenged, and much quicker and simpler to respond to. But it's an impulse that does not, I think, serve us. | | | The most fruitful point I see is Walker's -- we are currently bound together in a community that will break apart among wealth and power lines as soon as we enter our varying careers. It is also, I think, something we can keep in mind and try to fight, but it is worth remembering that over a hundred years ago Henry Adams made the same point, when he was betrayed by someone who had become Deputy Undersecretary of whatever, and wrote that "A friend in power is a friend lost." |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |