The Law as Science Project

Legal studies have been generally understood as a discipline outside science, traditionally consisting of doctrinal analysis and debates on normative questions. However, we believe it can be improved by, and benefit from, scientific methodologies that provide systematic ways to approach questions and deliver falsifiable claims.

Scientific methodologies should substantiate, support, and verify normative and doctrinal arguments. By this approach, claims are supported by testable theories, thus, expediting the accumulation of knowledge. Introducing scientific approaches–the method of inquiry–to legal studies, “Law as Science” emphasizes methodology in legal research.

We, as legal scholars, can benefit from an accurate factual depiction of society to facilitate the elaboration of sound normative implications, beyond mere intuitions or speculations. Different from other professionals in the legal field, scholars contribute to the systematic building of knowledge about the law.

The importance of scientific methodologies for legal scholars is twofold:

First, as a producer of legal research, scholars need to be responsive and open to other scientific fields, thereby bridging the discipline gap between law and science–integral to this process is being transparent about the applied methodology.

Second, as an importer of “scientific” findings or methodologies into legal research, scholars should be aware of their embeddedness in prior methodological debates and developments, and their potential limitations, before accepting them into the area of law.

To equip junior legal scholars with the toolkit, we invite scholars with diverse methodological backgrounds to conduct lectures, workshop research ideas, and form roundtable discussions. Ultimately, discussing methodologies in legal research shall engage scholars globally and help us find common grounds.

Law as Science

Drafted by Simon Sun, Vanessa Villanueva Collao, Patrick Chung-Chia Huang, and Daniel Haefke