2012•Oxford University Press eBooksOpen access

Can Law Survive Legal Education?

Ernest J. Weinrib

Open full text 12 citations

Abstract

This chapter deals with the disjunction between the practice of private law and its university study. This disjunction is the result of the prevailing instrumentalist approaches within the legal academy, which efface the characteristic concepts of private law, ignore the direct relationship between the parties, and assimilate private law into public law. The chapter sketches a different mode of legal understanding that elucidates the character of private law in terms of the correlative structure of its relationships and the normative standpoint of personality that those relationships presuppose. It then traces the implications of this mode of understanding for the interdisciplinary turn that is a conspicuous feature of contemporary legal education. Interdisciplinary study of law requires that law itself be recognized as a distinct discipline. Coase's treatment of the classic nuisance cases in his celebrated article on social cost exemplifies the failure to accord law this recognition.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This chapter deals with the disjunction between the practice of private law and its university study. This disjunction is the result of the prevailing instrumentalist approaches within the legal academy, which efface the characteristic concepts of private law, ignore the direct relationship between the parties, and assimilate private law into public law. The chapter sketches a different mode of legal understanding that elucidates the character of private law in terms of the correlative structure of its relationships and the normative standpoint of personality that those relationships presuppose. It then traces the implications of this mode of understanding for the interdisciplinary turn that is a conspicuous feature of contemporary legal education. Interdisciplinary study of law requires that law itself be recognized as a distinct discipline. Coase's treatment of the classic nuisance cases in his celebrated article on social cost exemplifies the failure to accord law this recognition.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 12 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This chapter deals with the disjunction between the practice of private law and its university study. This disjunction is the result of the prevailing instrumentalist approaches within the legal academy, which efface the characteristic concepts of private law, ignore the direct relationship between the parties, and assimilate private law into public law. The chapter sketches a different mode of legal understanding that elucidates the character of private law in terms of the correlative structure of its relationships and the normative standpoint of personality that those relationships presuppose. It then traces the implications of this mode of understanding for the interdisciplinary turn that is a conspicuous feature of contemporary legal education. Interdisciplinary study of law requires that law itself be recognized as a distinct discipline. Coase's treatment of the classic nuisance cases in his celebrated article on social cost exemplifies the failure to accord law this recognition.

Key concepts: Instrumentalism, Legal practice, Empirical legal studies, Legal profession, Legal realism, Legal research, Law, Legal formalism

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Can Law Survive Legal Education? — Research Paper | ScholarLens