Approach & Methodology

A.   A commitment to intellectual honesty.
I cannot commit for you, but I will commit myself to being intellectually honest. That is, I am willing to admit when I have made a mistake, and to make corrections. I don’t pretend to be able to get everything right the first time, but I will always try to make it right.

Now, I enjoy verbal repartee and arguing fine points as much as anyone (how could I engage in this exercise if I did not?). And while I will try to be exacting both in presenting the big picture and in working through the details, of some necessity there must initially be a focus on the big picture. So, first, I may simply not have time to respond to or work through all the minutiae while I’m trying to single-handedly re-think the entire field of law. So please allow me to beg off defending minor points at this time. Believe me, everything will eventually be revisited and dealt with.

Second, not everything becomes clear instantly. Sometimes, if you catch me in a flaw of logic, I may need to cogitate on it slowly, and work though the
ramifications carefully to my satisfaction, when I can either cheerfully admit my mistake, or give good grounds why it isn’t a mistake at all. And you know how it is – sometimes you have to stop trying to force a solution and relax, which is when the answer often comes. So if I delay in responding to you, it doesn’t mean I’m ignoring you or being dishonest – I’m just trying to avoid knee-jerk responses. And I will afford you the same courtesy.

B.   Reasonable.
Above all else, I wish to be reasonable. So I can at all times explain my position rationally, describe the evidence I find controlling, and provide the logic that leads me to my conclusion. What I cannot abide, and what I will never do, is to propound a conclusion which I cannot rationally explain, nor will I ever claim that no rationale is necessary. If you do the same, we will get along fabulously.

C.   A work in progress.
I am going to go through the whole field of law, and I’m going to have to do it in broad strokes at first. Details will be filled in later. Then will come biblical proofs, historical proofs, and a consideration of counter-arguments. Finally, when I have the assistance of thousands of staff, we can begin the diligent work of examining cases and casebooks, and applying principles to specific fact situations to derive a comprehensive jurisprudence. Don’t look for it in six weeks.

D.   Interactive: a discussion.
Along the way, I encourage your comments, feedback, criticism, research, anecdotes, and contributions. If you just want to vent, don’t expect a response. Irrational gibberish will be ignored.