« An Addendum to Rick Hills: DeGirolami on "Why Liberalism Failed" and "Legal Liberalism" | Main | Legal Ed's Futures: No.1 »

Saturday, March 03, 2018

The Future of Legal Scholarship - April 6 2018 Conference in Chicago

This should be an excellent conference, with keynote speaker Richard Posner and excellent participants including Mark Lemley, Darren Bush, Anthony Kreis, Eric Segall, Caprice Roberts, Spencer Waller, Nancy Leong, and prawfsblawgers me and Carissa Hessick. Topics include what makes a good law review article and does scholarship live in a vaccum. If you are in Chicago please join us! 

[also if you are in Chicago a couple of weeks earlier I'll be giving book talks March 22 at the Seminary Coop - details here and BookIt speakers series at Chicago-Kent details here.

 

Posted by Orly Lobel on March 3, 2018 at 11:50 PM | Permalink

Comments

Sounds like a great conference. For those of us who can't make it in person, will it be streamed/recorded?

Posted by: Alan Rozenshtein | Mar 4, 2018 12:23:00 PM

let me find out - hope it will!

Posted by: Orly Lobel | Mar 4, 2018 3:23:39 PM

Looks like a great conference. I'd also like to listen/watch if that's an option.

A small thought on the approach of the conference: Do the first two panels presuppose that there is a single best approach to legal scholarship? I wonder because I would guess that most of us are pluralists. We see many different and equally valuable ways to evaluate the strength and value of different types of scholarship. If that's right, it may be hard to define "good" and "useful" because different people properly have different value systems and priorities. And if that's right, it may also have relevance to the third panel, on quantitative measures of success. I suspect pretty much everyone sees those measures as flawed even among those who agree with the value that the numbers are trying to measure; better than nothing, often, but still flawed. But if people have different values, then quantitative measures may go from being seen as flawed to some to being seen as just irrelevant to others.

Posted by: Orin Kerr | Mar 5, 2018 2:48:03 AM

"it may be hard to define "good" and "useful" because different people properly have different value systems and priorities"

I'd say we're all fated to end up with the same value systems and priorities (especially since we already have the same religion). It may take another few months, but I think China, Saudi Arabia, and the United States will all have the same legal system and bill of rights.
Already, someone from California and Alabama pretty much agree on taxes, guns, abortion, and affirmative action, for instance.
Since in the U.S. we already feel the same about the bill of rights, it's only a matter of time until the Chinese and Saudis agree with us on the best approach to law and order.

Posted by: Roddenberry's jeans | Mar 5, 2018 8:54:15 AM

Orin these are all really important questions and I do think we will be discussing them, not only in the third panel but throughout the conference. I certainly don't assume in my panel that there is a single unified idea of what constitutes good scholarship. I think the panels will be a great place to open up this discussion of the different channels and approaches to legal scholarship in a changing world.

Posted by: Orly Lobel | Mar 5, 2018 12:41:03 PM

Post a comment