Darwin’s Dictum – “all observations must be for or against some view if they are to be of any service”

Many of my posts recount a law department practice. I rarely summon any theoretical framework because I cannot perceive for law department management any persuasive theories. No one has unified the field of managing in-house lawyers with fundamental principles that do not contradict at some point.

E=MC2 may someday also stand for Effectiveness = Mass (number of lawyers in a department) multiplied by the Speed of Thought Squared, but not now.

When Michael Shermer, Science Friction: Where the Known Meets the Unknown (Time Books 2005) at 71, states “Darwin’s Dictum” – extracted from a letter Darwin wrote in 1861 – I cringed for not complementing observations on this blog with some “view,” some larger theoretical construct (See my post of June 10, 2007: facts gathered depend on one’s theoretical understanding; Feb. 21, 2007: no “facts” without some theory and multiple explanations.). I wish I could advance over-arching theories, but, alas, such is not my gift, not yet.

My efforts on this blog have been a dog’s breakfast of theoretical thinking (See my post of June 6, 2006: mental models are closer to theories; Aug. 22, 2006: observations, trends and predictions; May 31, 2006: values underlie all management decisions; July 14, 2006: narratives, theories, and models; and Feb. 6, 2007: models of law departments.). Gradually, this chaotic and undisciplined field will lead to more synthetic thinking that pulls the strands together into broader insights.

We welcome comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *