There are books, but not all that comprises law is "on them" as you might expect. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic license from Alan Shin.
The New York Times editorialized this weekend on the need for reforms to the legal education system–mainly a shift from theoretical to more practical training–while making some uncharacteristically strident pronouncements on the nature of law. Meanwhile, I’ve lately stumbled into one epic discussion after another about whether “science” as a general category includes the social sciences, or whether, as one friend put it, science ! = natural science (meaning science factorial; e.g. 3 ! = 3*2*1 = 6). This is not an opportunity to rehash that grueling debate, which, in any event, is one best had by mediated bodies of actual experts, like the National Academy of Sciences. The debate has been grist, though, for a related set of thoughts drawn from my work as an attorney and extern in several federal courts, as well as from conversations I’ve had with other attorneys with similar backgrounds. These thoughts have mounted toward the conclusion that attorneys and the general public alike would benefit from better understanding law as a social science. Read more
