This is a linkpost for In Defense of Lawyers Playing Their Part.

Michael Huemer writes about why he believes it's wrong for lawyers to pursue unjust legal outcomes.

It's a good article, and one of the best defenses of this position I've seen. Still, I think this argument is mistaken. The reason why we require lawyers to fight for "their side" even if they believe they're in the wrong is to minimize the opportunity for bias.

Imagine if all trials were bench trials, decided by only one person as the judge. Even if they're taught to be as objective as possible, there would still be significant concerns about unconscious bias. One person only has one set of experiences to draw on, which is necessarily not very representative of the full range of experiences. And in some ways this problem becomes worse the more training the judge is given, since [...]

---

Outline:

(02:58) 2.1. The epistemological problem

(07:32) 2.2. The lawyer as friend

(07:49) 2.3. Faith in the system

(08:54) 2.4. Rule consequentialism

(10:05) 2.5. The right to a fair trial

(11:18) 3. Lying vs. Misleading

(13:13) Overview

The original text contained 6 footnotes which were omitted from this narration.

---

First published:
July 1st, 2024

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/FMKnFxgbtCLxPPS4J/in-defense-of-lawyers-playing-their-part

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

“In Defense of Lawyers Playing Their Part” by Isaac King

LessWrong (30+ Karma)