Best Science For Lawyers?

It is hard to think of a better answer than: “what science can do that law cannot.”

This question was raised by Willy Fischler, the dean of the University of California at Berkeley School of Law and author of The Science and Politics of Climate Change, in his recent piece for New York magazine titled Sorting through the Decades-Old Debate over Why Humans Persist on Earth. In it he describes an issue that has been with us since we started studying human behavior: our tendency toward denial when confronted with facts contrary to our beliefs. If you believe that humans cause climate change then it doesn’t matter what else you hear or read because your belief comes first and everything else is just more evidence for why you are right about it! But if you have reason to doubt this particular theory from which your whole worldview flows, well…there is no denying reality anymore. And this leads Fischler to ask whether there is anything science can do in such instances? Maybe something like explaining all sides so each person can come up with their own reasoning about how best to live together on earth? And not merely explain but provide a deeper understanding into human nature that allows people to make better choices about how they deal with their fellow man? Is there a way science can be useful here? Or will people continue arguing ad nauseam until one side dies out while holding onto its rigid ideas regardless any new information or logic being put forth from other points-of-view

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *