| |
LukeReillyIntro 3 - 05 Feb 2015 - Main.LukeReilly
|
|
META TOPICPARENT | name="PersonalIntro" |
Luke Reilly Personal Introduction
The question your introduction should answer, in not more than 100 words, is what you want to get from law school. | | I want to learn the reasons that legal structures and rules and decisions exist. I want to understand why this or that result happened. Hopefully, this will allow me to work to solidify the laws I find just, and change the others. | |
> > | -- LukeReilly - 29 Jan 2015 | |
In what way do you imagine yourself "solidifying" law? | | do table manners exist?
| |
> > |
Laws are solidified by continued application, support, and justification. If, as we've discussed, laws need to make sense in present contexts and for present reasons, then it follows that current laws that we find desirable may required new justification. It may be that a law does not serve the purposes it once did, yet should still be law. It then requires something new to support it.
Table manners exist for a few reasons, depending on the manner in question.
- First, some exist to prevent actions that often disgust others. Example: Don't chew with one's mouth open. Keep your napkin in your lap.
- Second, some exist as signs of respect towards others. Examples: Don't use your cell phone at the table. Wait until the host/hostess has eaten before you begin.
- Third, some exist to ensure that everybody does the same thing for logistical purposes. Example: Keep your bread plate on your left and your drink on your right.
- Finally, some seem to have no reason at all that I can discern. Example: In the US, you switch your fork after cutting and before eating (a piece of chicken for example).
This last one serves as an excellent example of my point. I hate that rule. I was taught it all through my childhood, and it never made the slightest bit of sense to me. In fact, it seems more efficient to keep your fork in your off hand and your knife in your dominant hand, as it avoids all the switching nonsense. [Sidenote: if anybody has a good reason for that rule, I'd love to hear it.]
I consider understanding the purpose behind rules a necessary prerequisite to potentially changing them. The rule against chewing with one's mouth open exists to ensure that your actions won't upset others. I understand why this rule exists and it makes sense. I have no desire to change it. The switch-your-fork rule is senseless (to me). I want to change/ignore it.
Similarly, when there are legal rules that are senseless to me, or which have effects that I consider unjust in various ways, I find myself wanting to change them. To do this, I feel I need to understand why the rule came into being in the first place.
-- LukeReilly - 05 Feb 2015 | | | |
< < | -- LukeReilly - 29 Jan 2015 | |
\ No newline at end of file |
|
|
|
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.
|
|
| |