Abstract
In discussions leading up to the publication recently of the
discipline standards for law, there was naturally a focus on
thinking skills. Indeed many law students and practitioners
would be familiar with the mantra of ‘thinking like a lawyer’.
Some claim that ‘thinking like a lawyer’ is a nebulous concept,
others that it is a ‘self-aggrandising sham … to justify the
existence of a … special lawyer class’.
Whether or not one accepts that there is a particular mode
of thought or reasoning or analysis that belongs to lawyers in
particular, there is growing evidence to show that the way we
teach lawyers and the way that law is practised is in fact linked
to psychological distress.
discipline standards for law, there was naturally a focus on
thinking skills. Indeed many law students and practitioners
would be familiar with the mantra of ‘thinking like a lawyer’.
Some claim that ‘thinking like a lawyer’ is a nebulous concept,
others that it is a ‘self-aggrandising sham … to justify the
existence of a … special lawyer class’.
Whether or not one accepts that there is a particular mode
of thought or reasoning or analysis that belongs to lawyers in
particular, there is growing evidence to show that the way we
teach lawyers and the way that law is practised is in fact linked
to psychological distress.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 298-298 |
| Number of pages | 1 |
| Journal | Alternative Law Journal |
| Volume | 37 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs |
|
| Publication status | Published - 2012 |
| Externally published | Yes |