Book Review: The Mind and Method of the Legal Academic
| Published date | 01 June 2013 |
| Date | 01 June 2013 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1023263X1302000211 |
| Author | Tomi Tuominen |
| Subject Matter | Book Review |
20 MJ 2 (2013) 327
BOOK REVIEW
J.M. Smits, e Mind and Method of the Legal Academic, E dward Elgar Publish ing,
Cheltenham-Northampton 2012, i x + 180 pp. incl. index, hardback, £65, ISBN 978–
0–85793–654–7.
e met hodology of legal science a nd legal doctrine has received a lot of attention in
recent years.1 is is of course usef ul for the legal academia since one should every now
and then pause to think of what it is that we are actually doing. However, this plethora
of publications on legal methodolog y poses a problem for one writing on the topic: how
to say something genuine and interesting on the theme? Jan M. Smits, who is Professor
of European Private Law at Maast richt University, has undertaken this intractable task
in his book e Mind and Method of the Legal Academic. e book presents Sm its’
assessment on what is legal science, how it should be conducted, and also taught at
universities. His centra l argument is that legal schola rship should primarily be interested
in what the law ought to be.
e traditional approach of legal science, the doctrina l study of law from an
internal perspective with an emphasis on systematization of legal rules, has been the
subject of increasing criticism dur ing the past decades. Is t he internal perspect ive,
which regards law as an autonomous system and takes positive law as given, adequate
to grasp the problems that law is faced with in modern society? Smits states that his
sta rtin g point i s to cont ribute to thi s disc ussion . Where as many criti cs have a rgued for
the external v iew and the use of ‘law and …’ approaches, Smits stresses t he importance
‘to rediscover the legal approach to the law’.2 e theoretical, methodological and
practical arg uments he makes all stem from this v iewpoint. e book al so contributes
to the discussion on tr ying to make lega l science truly scienti c, but this is done by
turning the paradigm upside down: the ontology of law dictates how we should go
about doing legal research, therefore legal s cience should not emulate other sciences in
search of acceptance.
1 See for example for a theoretical, practical and empirical approach: M. Van Hoecke (ed.), Methodolog ies
of Legal Researc h: Which Kind of Method for What Kin d of Discipline? (Hart, Oxford 2011); R. Cryer,
T. Hervey, B. Sokhi-Bu lley and A. Bohm, Rese arch Methodologies in EU and Inte rnational Law (Hart,
Oxford 2011); M. Siems and D. Mac Síthigh, ‘Mappi ng Legal Research ’, 71 e C ambridge Law Journa l
3 (2012).
2 J.M. Smits, e Mind and Method of the Legal Academic (E dward Elgar Pu blishing, Che ltenham-
Northampton 2012), p.7.
To continue reading
Request your trial