Over at The Faculty Lounge blog Al Brophy (UNC) has a thoughtful post on Dean Levi's review of How Judges Think, which has also appeared recently in the Duke Law Journal. Although Al's main emphasis is on the legal history aspects, he also understands the strong empirical overlay when he notes:
"[former federal judge and now Duke Law Dean] Levi's main point is that Posner is insufficiently empirical in assessing how judges think. Some may think that an odd criticism given how deeply empirical so much of Posner's work is; however, I suppose this book seeks to provide a framework for subsequent investigation. Certainly a lot of this can be empirically tested (though not necessarily easily)."
Comments