Quote:
Originally posted by Not Me
I just think from an educational perspective (not about practicing law once you finish), classes like con law and even torts are more cerebral when you are taught not just the law, but the history of the law, the policy considerations, whether this system is better than other systems, should it be changed, etc. In my experience, the business association classes and UCC classes were more focused on teaching you how to practice the law, which is a more vocational and less intellectual bent.
|
You are right if you mean that business law classes do not ask such questions as "what is the nature of law" like a jurisprudence class would ask or "how should a government be organized, like in Con law. But neither does, e.g., torts. Do ou not think that in, for example, a securities regulation class you are not taught the history, the policy considerations, etc.? Any securities law class that is not teaching those facets is doing students a disservice because that teaching is extremely useful in practice, especially in dealings with the SEC.
Quote:
|
Originally posted by Not Me I am not sure how you define non-business law. Do you include intellectual property as business or non-business law?
|
I consider IP law as business. The P is a dead giveaway IMHO.
