Schlag s implicit definition of reason and his argumentative style are more scholastic than the legal and academic rhetorics that he criticizes. The city argued that the residents in the home would be at risk because the site was on a 500-year flood plane and that the residents might bother the neighborhood. But the majority, ruling against the city, noted that a school was already located on the same flood plane in the neighborhood and that mentally retarded children attended that school. This stance certainly discourages the search for coherences in moments. In close, this book reaffirms a suspicion I have had about the scholarly work of law professors.
Law professors seem much more persuasive when they write articles than when they write books.
I have over the last decade or so read a number of very convincing, clearly argued, and analytically admirable articles by Professor Schlag. Since tenure in law school rarely requires a book, book projects often take on the quality of an intellectual holiday.