Tags

,

If in my distant past Jeremy Waldon had delivered the lecture I heard today I would have tried hard to become a lawyer. That general line of thinking usually doesn’t have much appeal for me because it seems so constrained by artificial definitions. My inclinations are for a more freewheeling type of thought seeking answers to ultimate but solvable questions, like how to make a better mousetrap. Those types of questions have definable solutions which can have realistic comparisons and ratings so their validity can be compared and validated. But Professor Waldron makes searching out the meaty philosophical underpinnings of law an exciting form or research. It becomes a search after a sort of abstract truth which can be applied to human beings.