Reviews for Logic and politics

The average rating for Logic and politics based on 2 reviews is 3.5 stars.

Review # 1 was written on 2013-10-24 00:00:00 Jen Stoner Nothing special. An alright summary of some mainstream aspects of legal philosophy. Let down, however, by the chapter on ‘critical perspectives’, which seems mostly to have been included so that the author can say that it was included, or just to dismiss any heterodox theories (particularly disappointing since law, as much as anything else, is in need of perspectives from outside of the mainstream). The section on Marxism is about two pages long and relies entirely on one other book (which I’d already read: Marxism and Law). No surprises, then, that McLeod takes the (wrong) interpretation from that book and then adds his own misunderstandings; even the useful points in Collins’ book have been overlooked in favour of a Red Scare caricature of Marxism. The value of Marxism, says McLeod, is mostly via its impact on critical legal theory, which he then proceeds to dismiss, in the space of a page and a half, as being ‘trendy’, appealing to the ‘less bright student’, and lacking in constructive criticism. The section on feminism is six pages long, one third of which consists of quotes included in support of the proposition that feminism existed before the 1960s: hardly a claim that needed to be defended in such detail. The remaining four pages are at worst dismissive, and at best don’t seem to actually try to engage with the theory at all; the final subsection asks why feminism has not had a greater impact. Why indeed? (For McLeod, it appears that the answer is that feminists are overreacting, which causes people not to take them seriously.) There are probably better books on mainstream legal theory, but there are certainly better books on Marxism and feminism. The author would probably benefit from reading some of them.

Review # 2 was written on 2013-11-05 00:00:00 Vygintas Astrauskas Read this as part of our law faculty reading group. We met monthly and Fred Geddicks led discussions. Dworkin provides a liberal's con law theory answer to conservatives' Originalism. I recommend if you have someone like Fred (a Constitutional law expert) to lead you through the book.