The Actual Connection between Law and Philosophy (Spoiler Alert: It's Ugly)

It is frequently asserted that there exists a significant correlation between the disciplines of philosophy and law, as evidenced by the substantial number of philosophy graduates who pursue careers in the legal profession. However, this proposition is fraught with complexities. Upon engaging with legal studies, particularly in courses such as international law, one may discern an apparent absence of philosophical inquiry. The assumption that logic inherently underpins legal education is not entirely accurate; indeed, legal studies may exhibit less logical rigor than numerous other fields.

Upon closer examination, a rather disconcerting connection between philosophy and law emerges, reflecting negatively on both legal education and the institutionalization of philosophy. This linkage reveals that, within academic philosophy, the pursuit of truth is often secondary to strategic manipulation. Members of the philosophical community frequently focus on navigating procedural intricacies to gain advantage, whether for recognition or prestige, rather than engaging in genuine epistemic exploration.

Similarly, the study and practice of law are characterized by an emphasis on procedural adherence rather than truth-seeking. The legal system is distinguished by its focus on procedural compliance, a paradigm that does not necessarily equate to adherence to normative principles. This proceduralism, prevalent in both philosophical and legal contexts, is marked by an emphasis on strategic maneuvering over substantive truth discovery. Consequently, the connection between these two fields lies not in their shared commitment to logic or ethical norms, but rather in their mutual entrenchment in procedural manipulation.