Law in Contemporary Society

View   r3  >  r2  >  r1
MitchellHokansonFirstEssay 3 - 31 May 2017 - Main.MitchellHokanson
Added:
>
>
Revision 3 is unreadable
Deleted:
<
<
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstEssay"

Dishonest Work

-- By MitchellHokanson - 10 Mar 2017

Construction

When I worked construction, nobody ever questioned my morals. I was just a man in dusty jeans and a hard-hat who got up at four-thirty in the morning to do an honest day’s work for an honest day’s pay.

I got a different reaction when people found out I was going to law school. Most of the responses were congratulatory, but more than a few people were immediately apprehensive. They asked why I wanted to learn to become a liar, a conman, a deceiver with no moral compass. I laughed these accusations off, but I never shook the feeling that I lost their trust.

Where Lawyers Rank

According to polling data, my experience is common. Twenty-six percent of people polled have a “low” level of trust and eleven percent have a “very low” level of trust in lawyers. Not grouped with other professionals, like doctors and engineers (who are distrusted by fewer than ten percent of respondents), lawyers are sandwiched between business executives and insurance salesmen.

But not everyone distrusts lawyers. In fact, forty-five percent of respondents trusted lawyers an “average” amount. This is not so different from the Clergy (39) and Psychiatrists (45). These occupations, however, received much fewer “low” and “very low” ratings. This data, while revealing, does not answer the question of why it is that people distrust lawyers so much.

Why Don’t We Trust Lawyers?

It could be that lawyers are actually more corrupt than nurses and police officers, and less corrupt than car salespersons and stockbrokers. An OECD study showing that thirty-eight percent of US law practitioners believe that corruption is a problem in the US, seems to support this idea. But this answer seems unfulfilling—it is possible that such a simple reason exists, but there are more compelling reasons why lawyers are seen as untrustworthy.

Another theory is that lawyers contribute less to society than doctors and police officers. While historic civil rights victories seem to disprove this theory, not to mention the private victories that lawyers secure for their clients, thirty-four percent of people think lawyers contribute “not much” to society’s well-being according to a Pew survey. But this is just as likely a symptom of the distrust, rather than the cause. What is it, then, that makes the general populace distrust lawyers so much?

I posit that one of the main reasons that people distrust lawyers is that they practice the unnatural black art of the law—something the average person can neither see nor comprehend. Comprised of a secret language, with very particular man-made rules, the law is opaque. To an outsider, any person who can knows the law can use it in sinister ways with the general populace none the wiser. Furthermore, in keeping with the idea that lawyers possess secret knowledge, they are seen as duplicitous due to the possession of the secret facts of their cases. The nature of their occupation leads laypersons to believe that lawyers may actively obscure the truth to ensure a victory for their client. The reason lawyers are distrusted is because their occupation and tools are cloaked in secrecy.

The Impossibility of Seeing the Law

We fear what we cannot see and what we do not understand. What goes bump in the night is terrifying only because we cannot see that that the culprit is only the wind. The law is one of these bumps in the night.

Unlike doctors or engineers, who deal with our bodies and with physics (things most can intuitively understand and see), lawyers stand apart. Our bodies, physics, and the law are all complicated, but what separates law from the others is that law is not natural and not intuitive. A layperson’s difficulty in understanding the law leads to a perception that the lawyer is privy to and plays by a different and secret set of rules. Lawyers seem to be able to see in three-dimensions where most can only see in two, and this leads to confusion and breeds distrust. The specialized language, the Latin phrases, and the complex organizational rules all contribute to this phenomenon. The law is never simplified for the layperson—on the contrary, complexity is more valued, as it leads to more specificity. The artificial nature of the law and its lack of intuitiveness is the key to understanding why people do not trust attorneys—when you cannot see the law, it is difficult to believe in it and those who practice it.

Zealous Advocates or Moral Opportunists?

The second reason people distrust lawyers is that they believe that lawyers actively conceal the truth in order to win cases for their clients. The ABA’s Rules of Professional Conduct list zealous advocacy for clients as one of the main responsibilities of a lawyer. To be a zealous advocate, a lawyer must use the facts and the law to paint their client in the best light possible, within the requirements of honest dealings. To many, this discretion is the root of corruption—lawyers suspend their morals in pursuit of victory for their clients. A lawyer who represents the accused must be privy to facts that prove guilt, and must be concealing these facts so that a guilty person can go free. The secrecy that permeates the lawyer’s practice and their seemingly perverse responsibility to craft the best story for their client generates distrust in lawyers.

Conclusion

It is possible that lawyers are simply corrupt, or that they contribute very little to society, and are not deserving of trust. But these theories are too simple, and raise more questions than they answer. The distrust stems from the arcane rules and language that make up the law, and the concealment that the practice requires. Because the law is incomprehensible to the average person and because lawyers are shrouded in secrecy, it all seems sinister. From the outside, the craft of a lawyer looks unnatural and amoral—dishonest work for dishonest pay. But they still hire us, so does trust really matter?

Yes, it matters to you. You wrote about it. It affects your dignity. Not having people question your morals is an important part of your dignity to you. If you could have it working construction, why not as a lawyer?

Perhaps 38% of lawyers in the US think corruption is a problem because—being lawyers—they are never far from evil: they see more of it than their fellow citizens, and are therefore not necessarily more corrupt, but more aware.

I think you are correct in your overall surmise. I was going to shorten the question by asking you about the occupational trust statistics for wizards. But there aren't any wizards, only lawyers, in this system. Doctors are trusted, as engineers are trusted, because they are seen as scientifically guided in a society that (mostly) believes in science. But we do not proselytize for law as a science in this society—as Western European societies do—because of the mind-set we called American Legal Realism. Because US lawyers are practicing an art, they are suspect in a democratic society that expects the rules to be clear, and wants those who "play by the rules" (which is always every voter) to be decently treated.

But people trust their own lawyers more than they trust other people, as one would expect. It's that lawyers are often on the other side that makes them particularly untrustworthy, compared to doctors who are never on the side of illness, or engineers who never want bridges to fall over.

So the question one might want the next draft to consider is "what difference does it make whether people distrust lawyers if the people who deal with me mostly consider me trustworthy?" Realism thinks of trust as a property of relations with people, not as a logic of public opinion. That might be worth taking into consideration.


MitchellHokansonFirstEssay 2 - 07 May 2017 - Main.EbenMoglen
Line: 1 to 1
 
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstEssay"

Dishonest Work

Line: 27 to 27
 The second reason people distrust lawyers is that they believe that lawyers actively conceal the truth in order to win cases for their clients. The ABA’s Rules of Professional Conduct list zealous advocacy for clients as one of the main responsibilities of a lawyer. To be a zealous advocate, a lawyer must use the facts and the law to paint their client in the best light possible, within the requirements of honest dealings. To many, this discretion is the root of corruption—lawyers suspend their morals in pursuit of victory for their clients. A lawyer who represents the accused must be privy to facts that prove guilt, and must be concealing these facts so that a guilty person can go free. The secrecy that permeates the lawyer’s practice and their seemingly perverse responsibility to craft the best story for their client generates distrust in lawyers.

Conclusion

It is possible that lawyers are simply corrupt, or that they contribute very little to society, and are not deserving of trust. But these theories are too simple, and raise more questions than they answer. The distrust stems from the arcane rules and language that make up the law, and the concealment that the practice requires. Because the law is incomprehensible to the average person and because lawyers are shrouded in secrecy, it all seems sinister. From the outside, the craft of a lawyer looks unnatural and amoral—dishonest work for dishonest pay. But they still hire us, so does trust really matter?
Added:
>
>

Yes, it matters to you. You wrote about it. It affects your dignity. Not having people question your morals is an important part of your dignity to you. If you could have it working construction, why not as a lawyer?

Perhaps 38% of lawyers in the US think corruption is a problem because—being lawyers—they are never far from evil: they see more of it than their fellow citizens, and are therefore not necessarily more corrupt, but more aware.

I think you are correct in your overall surmise. I was going to shorten the question by asking you about the occupational trust statistics for wizards. But there aren't any wizards, only lawyers, in this system. Doctors are trusted, as engineers are trusted, because they are seen as scientifically guided in a society that (mostly) believes in science. But we do not proselytize for law as a science in this society—as Western European societies do—because of the mind-set we called American Legal Realism. Because US lawyers are practicing an art, they are suspect in a democratic society that expects the rules to be clear, and wants those who "play by the rules" (which is always every voter) to be decently treated.

But people trust their own lawyers more than they trust other people, as one would expect. It's that lawyers are often on the other side that makes them particularly untrustworthy, compared to doctors who are never on the side of illness, or engineers who never want bridges to fall over.

So the question one might want the next draft to consider is "what difference does it make whether people distrust lawyers if the people who deal with me mostly consider me trustworthy?" Realism thinks of trust as a property of relations with people, not as a logic of public opinion. That might be worth taking into consideration.

 \ No newline at end of file

MitchellHokansonFirstEssay 1 - 10 Mar 2017 - Main.MitchellHokanson
Line: 1 to 1
Added:
>
>
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstEssay"

Dishonest Work

-- By MitchellHokanson - 10 Mar 2017

Construction

When I worked construction, nobody ever questioned my morals. I was just a man in dusty jeans and a hard-hat who got up at four-thirty in the morning to do an honest day’s work for an honest day’s pay.

I got a different reaction when people found out I was going to law school. Most of the responses were congratulatory, but more than a few people were immediately apprehensive. They asked why I wanted to learn to become a liar, a conman, a deceiver with no moral compass. I laughed these accusations off, but I never shook the feeling that I lost their trust.

Where Lawyers Rank

According to polling data, my experience is common. Twenty-six percent of people polled have a “low” level of trust and eleven percent have a “very low” level of trust in lawyers. Not grouped with other professionals, like doctors and engineers (who are distrusted by fewer than ten percent of respondents), lawyers are sandwiched between business executives and insurance salesmen.

But not everyone distrusts lawyers. In fact, forty-five percent of respondents trusted lawyers an “average” amount. This is not so different from the Clergy (39) and Psychiatrists (45). These occupations, however, received much fewer “low” and “very low” ratings. This data, while revealing, does not answer the question of why it is that people distrust lawyers so much.

Why Don’t We Trust Lawyers?

It could be that lawyers are actually more corrupt than nurses and police officers, and less corrupt than car salespersons and stockbrokers. An OECD study showing that thirty-eight percent of US law practitioners believe that corruption is a problem in the US, seems to support this idea. But this answer seems unfulfilling—it is possible that such a simple reason exists, but there are more compelling reasons why lawyers are seen as untrustworthy.

Another theory is that lawyers contribute less to society than doctors and police officers. While historic civil rights victories seem to disprove this theory, not to mention the private victories that lawyers secure for their clients, thirty-four percent of people think lawyers contribute “not much” to society’s well-being according to a Pew survey. But this is just as likely a symptom of the distrust, rather than the cause. What is it, then, that makes the general populace distrust lawyers so much?

I posit that one of the main reasons that people distrust lawyers is that they practice the unnatural black art of the law—something the average person can neither see nor comprehend. Comprised of a secret language, with very particular man-made rules, the law is opaque. To an outsider, any person who can knows the law can use it in sinister ways with the general populace none the wiser. Furthermore, in keeping with the idea that lawyers possess secret knowledge, they are seen as duplicitous due to the possession of the secret facts of their cases. The nature of their occupation leads laypersons to believe that lawyers may actively obscure the truth to ensure a victory for their client. The reason lawyers are distrusted is because their occupation and tools are cloaked in secrecy.

The Impossibility of Seeing the Law

We fear what we cannot see and what we do not understand. What goes bump in the night is terrifying only because we cannot see that that the culprit is only the wind. The law is one of these bumps in the night.

Unlike doctors or engineers, who deal with our bodies and with physics (things most can intuitively understand and see), lawyers stand apart. Our bodies, physics, and the law are all complicated, but what separates law from the others is that law is not natural and not intuitive. A layperson’s difficulty in understanding the law leads to a perception that the lawyer is privy to and plays by a different and secret set of rules. Lawyers seem to be able to see in three-dimensions where most can only see in two, and this leads to confusion and breeds distrust. The specialized language, the Latin phrases, and the complex organizational rules all contribute to this phenomenon. The law is never simplified for the layperson—on the contrary, complexity is more valued, as it leads to more specificity. The artificial nature of the law and its lack of intuitiveness is the key to understanding why people do not trust attorneys—when you cannot see the law, it is difficult to believe in it and those who practice it.

Zealous Advocates or Moral Opportunists?

The second reason people distrust lawyers is that they believe that lawyers actively conceal the truth in order to win cases for their clients. The ABA’s Rules of Professional Conduct list zealous advocacy for clients as one of the main responsibilities of a lawyer. To be a zealous advocate, a lawyer must use the facts and the law to paint their client in the best light possible, within the requirements of honest dealings. To many, this discretion is the root of corruption—lawyers suspend their morals in pursuit of victory for their clients. A lawyer who represents the accused must be privy to facts that prove guilt, and must be concealing these facts so that a guilty person can go free. The secrecy that permeates the lawyer’s practice and their seemingly perverse responsibility to craft the best story for their client generates distrust in lawyers.

Conclusion

It is possible that lawyers are simply corrupt, or that they contribute very little to society, and are not deserving of trust. But these theories are too simple, and raise more questions than they answer. The distrust stems from the arcane rules and language that make up the law, and the concealment that the practice requires. Because the law is incomprehensible to the average person and because lawyers are shrouded in secrecy, it all seems sinister. From the outside, the craft of a lawyer looks unnatural and amoral—dishonest work for dishonest pay. But they still hire us, so does trust really matter?

Revision 3r3 - 31 May 2017 - 21:29:10 - MitchellHokanson
Revision 2r2 - 07 May 2017 - 19:50:01 - EbenMoglen
Revision 1r1 - 10 Mar 2017 - 17:53:17 - MitchellHokanson
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM