1L
The last year of law school is drawing to an end. During this time of hectic studying, I have decided to make some time to reflect, and write out the three lessons I have learned from law school. My adult life has mostly been a process of rapid growth. This process is not gradual and constant, but instead comes in violent spurts. This year has been one of the most violent and exponential spurts I have yet experienced.
1) The Internal Frame of Reference
Philosophically and psychologically I am a proponent of individualism. Philosophically this means that the individual is the context from which a standard of value is developed. Psychologically this means that I judge myself (and form my values) according to an internal frame of reference. Throughout my college years I have explored the concept of individualism and the philosophical components of it, as well as some psychological concepts and experiences. Law school has forced me to experience some very intense psychological experiences, going to the very root of my philosophical beliefs and sense of self.
To begin, some preliminary definitions.
External Frame of Reference - Discerning and judging your ability and performance based on the ability and performance of others. Also, choosing your value based on the values chosen by others. The latter half of the defintion leads to a lack of self, while the former leads to a lack of objectivity. Both lead to a phenomenon dubbed "second handedness" by the philosopher Ayn Rand.
Internal Frame of Reference - Discerning and judging your ability and performance based on the effort put forth and your past performances.
Now, I am not sure just how objective these concepts are. My intuition is that a proper frame of reference is not primarily internal or external, but that is another inquiry in itself. In general, the internal frame of reference, at least when judging ones self worth and choosing ones values, is the healthier frame of reference to have.
Law School is the anti-internal frame of reference experience. You are put into classrooms with people that have similar backgrounds of you. Everyone is intelligent, industrious, articulate, and competitive. Everyone is used to winning. The law school bases its 1st year grades on a strict curve, which depends on how everyone else does. You are not graded by how well you understand the concepts in relation to what the professor expects you to know. You are graded based on how everyone else does. There are necessarily persons who score in the top percentile, and persons who score on the bottom. Up the stakes a little; The persons on the bottom of the class will have trouble finding a job, the persons on the top will be able to start at $160,000 a year, and both top and bottom will owe around $100,000 in loans. Everyone is used to working hard, some more than others (because of work experience, or harder undergrads, or grad experiences.) However, not a single person will be ready for this. The amount of work is enormous, and the method of teaching is basically self taught. There is only one test for each class, and till then you have no idea whether you are grasping the concepts correctly or not. Finally, through the semester there are little competitions (Moot court, trial team, elections) which are also decided through competition.
Now, yes, this is the way of life. Intelligent people will compete with each other, and as long as that competition doesnt involve initiation of force, it leads to very good results. I am a supporter of competition. I am a supporter of meritocracy. Yet this context makes external frame of referencing THRIVE in every second hander, and gnaws at even the most internal referenced individual. There were nights when I have left the library at 1am, and felt guilty because I saw others still there working. There were nights when I unconsciously wished for others to do worse, just so I could do better. There were so many occasions such as this... Imagine 208 people (the 1st year class at W&M) and each one of them is experiencing this, and acting on this, in different degrees. It was very intense.
Now that I am about to survive the first year, I am glad that it was like this. Sitting at home, reading, and thinking, brings someone a long way towards self improvement. Even though this is true, nothing helps growth like adversity. Law school was the most intense adverse experience I have had thus far. It has made me all the stronger. My internal frame of reference has been battered severely, but it has come out that much stronger. I cannot speak for every student, yet this is definitely the case for some.
2) Thinking like a lawyer
Before law school I felt pretty cocky about my conceptual faculty, and logical reasoning. I sat in on some isolated law classes at FSU, and told myself 'this isnt too bad... With a philosophy background this will be cake.' Boy, was this naive. There is a reason some lawyers get paid $160,000 a year. Well, there are many reasons, the one which I find most striking is that 'thinking like a lawyer' is a mental skill that is highly difficult to acquire. Only through countless hours of reading, rereading, papercuts, internal dialogue, adrenaline pumping Socratic method, reading some more, trial and error, etc does one slooowly beging to think like a lawyer.
Ironically, I am not fully able to rationally describe exactly what this new method of thinking entails. The conceptual thinking of philosopher and a lawyer are not really that far removed... Both deal with big abstractions, both logically analyze the abstractions, both tend to integrate their empirical observations. What is far removed is the intense factual analysis that a lawyer partakes in. Hyper-rationality in applying various rule structures to various fact patterns, within the context of an extremely vast area of slippery knowledge. The law isnt 1 + 1 = 2, but instead X + Y * Z / A, and all variables are determined through further variables... Whenever I talk to someone now my mind is constantly reframing what they are saying, looking at it from different perspectives, thinking of whether it follows logically and empirically... My mind is constantly thinking of counter arguments, even if the person talking isnt arguing! It is no longer a conscious choice, but the default for my operating system. Needless to say, this tends to annoy some of my non-lawyer friends...
In a way, I feel like Neo after he figured out the Matrix. When a mechanical engineer looks at the world, he tends to see it in terms of thrusts and counter thrusts. A PUA tends to see it in terms of social interactions. I see the world in terms of legal rules and the analytical framework attached to them. I havent felt this way since I first discovered philosophy.. Actually, I dont think I have ever quite felt this way. It is very empowering. Philosophy lead me to discover what rights are. Lawyering taught me how to enforce them. This may be foolhardy, but I no longer fear threats from landlords, the police, government officials... Law school has shown me just how evil statism can be, but it has also shown me just how powerful rational advocacy can be.
3) Time management
The final thing law school has taught me, is time management. Thus, I must end this journal entry, for one hour is all I have to spare during finals time. ;) I hope you all enjoyed my post, and that I didnt spam you too much!
1) The Internal Frame of Reference
Philosophically and psychologically I am a proponent of individualism. Philosophically this means that the individual is the context from which a standard of value is developed. Psychologically this means that I judge myself (and form my values) according to an internal frame of reference. Throughout my college years I have explored the concept of individualism and the philosophical components of it, as well as some psychological concepts and experiences. Law school has forced me to experience some very intense psychological experiences, going to the very root of my philosophical beliefs and sense of self.
To begin, some preliminary definitions.
External Frame of Reference - Discerning and judging your ability and performance based on the ability and performance of others. Also, choosing your value based on the values chosen by others. The latter half of the defintion leads to a lack of self, while the former leads to a lack of objectivity. Both lead to a phenomenon dubbed "second handedness" by the philosopher Ayn Rand.
Internal Frame of Reference - Discerning and judging your ability and performance based on the effort put forth and your past performances.
Now, I am not sure just how objective these concepts are. My intuition is that a proper frame of reference is not primarily internal or external, but that is another inquiry in itself. In general, the internal frame of reference, at least when judging ones self worth and choosing ones values, is the healthier frame of reference to have.
Law School is the anti-internal frame of reference experience. You are put into classrooms with people that have similar backgrounds of you. Everyone is intelligent, industrious, articulate, and competitive. Everyone is used to winning. The law school bases its 1st year grades on a strict curve, which depends on how everyone else does. You are not graded by how well you understand the concepts in relation to what the professor expects you to know. You are graded based on how everyone else does. There are necessarily persons who score in the top percentile, and persons who score on the bottom. Up the stakes a little; The persons on the bottom of the class will have trouble finding a job, the persons on the top will be able to start at $160,000 a year, and both top and bottom will owe around $100,000 in loans. Everyone is used to working hard, some more than others (because of work experience, or harder undergrads, or grad experiences.) However, not a single person will be ready for this. The amount of work is enormous, and the method of teaching is basically self taught. There is only one test for each class, and till then you have no idea whether you are grasping the concepts correctly or not. Finally, through the semester there are little competitions (Moot court, trial team, elections) which are also decided through competition.
Now, yes, this is the way of life. Intelligent people will compete with each other, and as long as that competition doesnt involve initiation of force, it leads to very good results. I am a supporter of competition. I am a supporter of meritocracy. Yet this context makes external frame of referencing THRIVE in every second hander, and gnaws at even the most internal referenced individual. There were nights when I have left the library at 1am, and felt guilty because I saw others still there working. There were nights when I unconsciously wished for others to do worse, just so I could do better. There were so many occasions such as this... Imagine 208 people (the 1st year class at W&M) and each one of them is experiencing this, and acting on this, in different degrees. It was very intense.
Now that I am about to survive the first year, I am glad that it was like this. Sitting at home, reading, and thinking, brings someone a long way towards self improvement. Even though this is true, nothing helps growth like adversity. Law school was the most intense adverse experience I have had thus far. It has made me all the stronger. My internal frame of reference has been battered severely, but it has come out that much stronger. I cannot speak for every student, yet this is definitely the case for some.
2) Thinking like a lawyer
Before law school I felt pretty cocky about my conceptual faculty, and logical reasoning. I sat in on some isolated law classes at FSU, and told myself 'this isnt too bad... With a philosophy background this will be cake.' Boy, was this naive. There is a reason some lawyers get paid $160,000 a year. Well, there are many reasons, the one which I find most striking is that 'thinking like a lawyer' is a mental skill that is highly difficult to acquire. Only through countless hours of reading, rereading, papercuts, internal dialogue, adrenaline pumping Socratic method, reading some more, trial and error, etc does one slooowly beging to think like a lawyer.
Ironically, I am not fully able to rationally describe exactly what this new method of thinking entails. The conceptual thinking of philosopher and a lawyer are not really that far removed... Both deal with big abstractions, both logically analyze the abstractions, both tend to integrate their empirical observations. What is far removed is the intense factual analysis that a lawyer partakes in. Hyper-rationality in applying various rule structures to various fact patterns, within the context of an extremely vast area of slippery knowledge. The law isnt 1 + 1 = 2, but instead X + Y * Z / A, and all variables are determined through further variables... Whenever I talk to someone now my mind is constantly reframing what they are saying, looking at it from different perspectives, thinking of whether it follows logically and empirically... My mind is constantly thinking of counter arguments, even if the person talking isnt arguing! It is no longer a conscious choice, but the default for my operating system. Needless to say, this tends to annoy some of my non-lawyer friends...
In a way, I feel like Neo after he figured out the Matrix. When a mechanical engineer looks at the world, he tends to see it in terms of thrusts and counter thrusts. A PUA tends to see it in terms of social interactions. I see the world in terms of legal rules and the analytical framework attached to them. I havent felt this way since I first discovered philosophy.. Actually, I dont think I have ever quite felt this way. It is very empowering. Philosophy lead me to discover what rights are. Lawyering taught me how to enforce them. This may be foolhardy, but I no longer fear threats from landlords, the police, government officials... Law school has shown me just how evil statism can be, but it has also shown me just how powerful rational advocacy can be.
3) Time management
The final thing law school has taught me, is time management. Thus, I must end this journal entry, for one hour is all I have to spare during finals time. ;) I hope you all enjoyed my post, and that I didnt spam you too much!