E-mail:
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Corey Brettschneider corey_brettschneider at brown.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Jonathan Hafetz jonathan.hafetz at shu.edu
Jeremy Kessler jkessler at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman msl46 at law.georgetown.edu
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at yu.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
David Pozen dpozen at law.columbia.edu
Richard Primus raprimus at umich.edu
K. Sabeel Rahmansabeel.rahman at brooklaw.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
David Super david.super at law.georgetown.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Nelson Tebbe nelson.tebbe at brooklaw.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote a few brilliant aphorisms. His most famous was initially set out in an 1880 review of Langdell's Contracts book:
"The life of the law has not been logic: it has been experience."
That sounds perfect.
Compare that to the following line he wrote in 1870 to express the same basic idea:
"Law is not a science, but is essentially empirical."
Yuck! That line has never been quoted (until now), as far as I know, and for good reason.
For all the writers who struggle to get a phrase just right, remember this example when you are about to give up in frustration--and toil on. Posted
2:52 PM
by Brian Tamanaha [link]
The line comes from an article Holmes wrote when he served as an editor for the American Law Review: "Codes, and the Arrangement of the Law," 5 American Law Review 1,4 (1870).
Not only is there a difference in the style of the phrase, but in its meaning. The earlier quote opposes science and empiricism. Two concepts that are not actually opposed. Science relies on empirical evidence to justify a hypothesis. The hypoethsis of the "quintenssence" (or fifth element) of the ether was to be proved by Michalson and Morely's experiment. However, the practical result verified Einstien's theory's of special relativity.
The second sentence more correctly opposes logic and experience. This opposition makes sense because we can assume by logic, Holmes meant a rule based system that would create predictable results. However, such a rule based system is too deterministic. Holmes was too pragmatic for that and recognized that the facts of a given case can change the law.