Does studying philosophy make you a better law student more than other subjects?
<p>Though many excellent jurisprudents have studied philosophy, I recognise the Fallacy of Composition and so the question is: do philosophy enhances someone's abilities as a law student more than other subjects (eg: history, linguistics)?</p>

<p>PS: I am trying to discover the secrets and tricks on how to excel in law school; is the study of philosophy the key? For example, SCOTUS Justices Breyer and Souter majored in philosophy as undergraduates, and <a href="http://www.blackstonechambers.com/people/barristers/jessica_boyd.html" rel="nofollow">Jessica Boyd</a> and <a href="http://www.blackstonechambers.com/people/barristers/harry_adamson.html" rel="nofollow">Harry Adamson</a> have PhDs in Philosophy. </p>

<p>Last question first: there is <strong>only one</strong> secret or trick to exceling in any field of human endeavour; work your guts out. Having established this then the best thing to study are subjects that interest you so that working your guts out is more enjoyable than it would be with subjects that bore you.</p>

<p>I can see where philosophy would be complementary to lawyers who wish to be litigators or jurists as legal argument and philosophical argument are somewhat similar but that is a <em>tiny</em> fraction of the practice of law. Anyway, litigation is a lousy way of resolving disputes; generally, if you are heading to court you are sweeping up the debris of a failed relationship.</p>

<p>In contrast, a lawyer with skills is psychology may be worse at winning arguments but better at gaining consensus. A lawyer with technical expertise like engineering, science or medicine may be better positioned to work in areas of the law that affect those industries. A lawyer with HR knowledge will generally do better in employment law. And so on ...</p>

<p><strong>Do what you like!</strong></p>

legal-education