Abstract

The paper considers three aspects of Frederick Schauer's "Thinking Like a Lawyer": the account of the specificity of legal reasoning, the account of American realists' theory of adjudication, the theory of statutory interpretation. As to the specificity problem, Schauer sees the solution in a counterintuitive commitment to generality. An alternative solution is suggested, for argument's sake, emphasizing legal reasoning as practical, institutional, and rationalist reasoning about law. Coming to the realists' theory of adjudication, Schauer depicts it as a set of contingent empirical claims bound to a "double theory" view. An alternative view is outlined, that appeals to a few impossibility and necessity empirical claims of the realist outlook, and suggests its commitment to a "single theory" approach. Finally, coming to the theory of statutory interpretation, the "Victorian" orientation of Fred's account is emphasized on five counts.