This is cool, and unexpected: the University of Chicago has an annual feature where they ask what their faculty what was the last good book they read. Guess what book faculty member (and Holy Haleakala, Chief Judge for the Seventh Circuit United States Court of Appeals) Frank Easterbrook chose?
The bookstores and blogs are full of junk science, much of it predicting doom. So I enjoyed reading Death from the Skies! by a real scientist (Philip Plait), who also runs the Bad Astronomy blog, that mixes science news with exposing scientific bunkum. Plait evaluates the doomsayers’ predictions and assesses their likelihoods. He provides a convenient table of giant stars in the celestial neighborhood, just in case worries about supernovas and gamma ray bursts have kept you awake at night. A well-written book about science is always a good break from the law reports.
[I added the link, it's not in the original quote.]
That’s so excellent! I’m not sure I have the heart to tell him I went to the University of Chicago for a year… and dropped out. Long story, but eventually I went back to school (Michigan), got my degree, got my PhD, worked on Hubble for ten years, and now I sit in my office at home blogging while wearing flannel PJ bottoms!
If there’s a cautionary tale in there, I’m not seeing it.
December 6th, 2009 at 11:07 am
hehe there’s hope for the US court systems after all.
December 6th, 2009 at 11:19 am
Written by a real scientist, you say? I might have to read that one.
December 6th, 2009 at 11:41 am
You’ve written a book?
And here was me thinking this post was going to be about a lawyer defending those hospital workers who got fired.
December 6th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Bonus Fact: Frank Easterbrook sounds like James Earl Jones. To lawyers on the 7th Circuit, he is the judiciary equivalent of Darth Vader.
December 6th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
You know, it gives me great comfort to hear that you dropped out of university. I’ve dropped out of university in the past and am hopefully going to be going back next year (to study physics, naturally) so it’s nice to hear a success story.
December 6th, 2009 at 12:30 pm
The tale is this: to be successful, always wear pants.
December 6th, 2009 at 12:55 pm
En bog? Dig?
December 6th, 2009 at 1:06 pm
Don’t get too comfy in those pajamas. Person to person interaction is still important.
December 6th, 2009 at 2:00 pm
There’s a few lawyers I’d like to send “Death From The Skies” along with a few well placed Gamma Ray Bursts!
What do you call 200 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?
A start.
No, I don’t like lawyers.
December 6th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
Am I the only one worried that this judge/lawyer reads books about global annihilation to unwind?
December 6th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Well, lawyers stand to get a lot out of world-destroying events. If some of humanity survives, they’ll make billions on damage claims. And if, because their DNA is half-cockroach, the lawyers are the only survivors, then they get everything in the world (that remains) to themselves.
December 6th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
Phil, I know it is off topic and maybe you’ve already addressed it, but could you explain a “pair instability star” in more laymans terms, and also why some physicists did not think such a large star could exist?
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/091202-violent-massive-supernova.html
December 6th, 2009 at 4:29 pm
You wrote a book?
Did you hear about the lawyer that had diarrhea?
Yeah, he thought he was melting…
December 6th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
So, all of you who seem to enjoy knee jerk lawyer bashing- ‘who you gonna call’ the next time your neighbor, or the city government, or the IRS decides to go up against you? To a very real extent, lawyers are your last non-violent defense against tyranny.
Sure, there are plenty of sleazy lawyers. I am having to deal with a firm of them right. There are also a large number of lawyers who take on pro-bono work, who fight on long after innocent people were convicted to free them, and who take on large corporations to prevent harm to the rest of us. Yeah, some of these lawyers make a lot of money doing it, but not all.
The negative comments seen here seem to be more in the line of slogans or bumper strips, and not well considered. Most of you would not stand for a blanket attack against a group, based on the actions of a few members of the group.
Also, I see little relevance in your comments to the gist of Dr. Plait’s post. Just gratuitous bashing.
December 6th, 2009 at 6:37 pm
Flannel PJs. Mmmmm. It doesn’t get much better.
My grandmother used to make a pair for each of us every Christmas.
Now I see more deeply into you, Dr. Plait.
December 6th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
@MichaelL
Q: A cruise ship carrying a lawyer’s convention sank in shark-infested waters, but none of the lawyers was eaten. Why?
A: Professional courtesy.
I don’t mind lawyers, but I do like jokes about pretty much everything.
December 6th, 2009 at 7:34 pm
I wonder if this Easterbrook feller is on the short list for the Supremes. Might be nice to have someone on that court who reads pop-sci books for fun.
December 6th, 2009 at 9:13 pm
Donnie, you don’t want Easterbrook on the Supreme Court. You’d have two Scalia sized egos then. Plus he leans to the right, so he wouldn’t get a shot for the next 3+ years anyway.
December 6th, 2009 at 9:43 pm
It’s no coincidence that Judge Easterbrook digs science and skepticism – he’s well known among people like me who deal with tax denier / sovereign citizen / militia nutjobs. (the forums at quatloos.com are our hangout) The thoughtful, well-reasoned smackdowns he delivers to the whackjobs that appeal up to his level are highly regarded.
You think reading semi-coherent psuedoscience is mind-numbing? You should read some of the self-styled legal briefs from most of these people – total word salad.
December 6th, 2009 at 9:54 pm
#13 jearley,
I could do a far better job representing myself than having a lawyer charge me exhorbitant fees for photocopying and stapling papers together, and basically making an ass out of themselves before the judge… and not to mention me paying for her kids college education…let me guess… you are a lawyer??? The only good lawyer… one that bends over and gets royally screwed!
December 6th, 2009 at 10:41 pm
Just finished the book myself. I saw it in Borders when I was there with a friend and felt compelled to get it and read it. You have a strange writing style Plait that makes it feel like your simply conversing with the reader which makes it a fantastically easy read. Any new books in the pipeline?
December 6th, 2009 at 11:37 pm
3. Steven
“about a lawyer defending those hospital workers who got fired.
So, you don’t bother actually READING Phils post? Note that this particular lawyer is a fraking JUDGE! Judges don’t defend people. Try paying attention to more than the lead.
As my brother, the Rocket Scientist, commented one day, “W/O lawyers, we’d have no property law, railroads, damns and interstate highways would never have been built and we’d all be beating each other over the heads with clubs instead of with legal briefs.”
I think, on balance, MOST lawyers are OK, just people doing a much needed job and if you don’t like politicians, try BEING one of those and getting elected. Both jobs are difficult and thankless tasks. Which doesn’t mean I don’t enjoy jokes about them,,,(notice the neat way I used two double negatives in that sentence?)
As a drummer/physicist/engineer, I can tell jokes about nearly any profession. Now, if I was just a black, Jewish,,,happy,,,female, every other individual would be fair game.
How do you make a lead guitarist play slower?
Give him sheet music to read.(ba-dum-bum)
GAry 7
December 7th, 2009 at 3:10 am
“now I sit in my office at home blogging while wearing flannel PJ bottoms!”
You haven’t reached the pinnacle of success yet. NIFOTC?
December 7th, 2009 at 6:39 am
The moral of the story is you know you have made it when pants are optional
I am a software developer who often works from home, and I love that I can work all day in nothing but a bath robe
December 7th, 2009 at 7:53 am
Just think… If you hadn’t dropped out, maybe today you could’ve had a real job, rather than this “blogging” fad.
[insert obligatory lawyer joke here]
December 7th, 2009 at 8:10 am
obviously the good judge is a shill for Big Phila.
December 7th, 2009 at 8:19 am
Offtopic: Hey Phil… what’s this I hear on the JREF’s website about a new “opportunity in television” for you? Are you getting your own TV show? It’s a shame you’ll no longer have time to serve as JREF president, but it’s good to know you might have your own show.
Do tell… do tell.
December 7th, 2009 at 8:35 am
How do we get this guy nominated for the SCOTUS?
December 7th, 2009 at 8:38 am
@jearley, try to loosen up a little bit.
It’s all in good humour. As an AF Pilot, I have taken plenty of jokes at my own expense, and I can take them as well as I can dish them.
December 7th, 2009 at 9:07 am
Michigan? Know I know the secret of your success.
December 7th, 2009 at 1:40 pm
I wonder if Judge Frank Easterbrook is related to ESPN’s Gregg Easterbrook. Gregg writes a weekly NFL column and contains many personal thoughts and asides. In most every week, he includes thoughts on astronomy. (He also muses on cheerleaders, which is a plus.)
For instance, check http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=easterbrook/091124&sportCat=nfl. Most of the way down, he talks about NASA’s Gamma Ray Large Area Space Telescope and how a gamma ray can destroy us.
So one Easterbrook reads Dr. Plait’s book, while the other Easterbrook muses on the same destructive forces in his book. How eerie is this connection? (Answer: not very.)
December 7th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Those who follow the 7th Circuit very much having Judge Easterbook there, for the erudition and grace he conveys in his decisions. And the Easterbrook-Posner show can be highly entertaining. I am not surprised that Judge Easterbook reads things like “Death From The Skies!”, but thrilled that he admits it publicly.
@MURDATS (24) – you don’t do that if you have a new kitten who likes to climb. Just sayin’.
@Adrian Lopez (27) – if Phil is ON television, that means he can’t wear flannel jammie bottoms. I think. So he might prefer staying behind the scenes.
@Chris M (19) – I think you mean “total weird salad”.
@Romeo Vitelli (10) – I’d be more worried if a judge read romances or (shudder) the “Left Behind” books. Something that challenges a person to think? No problem.
And to all the persons who are upset at the gratuitous lawyer-bashing, let us not forget that William Shakespeare wrote what has become the spine of many lawyer jokes in Act IV, Scene II, of Henry VI (Part 2) – because while many people take it as a ding on lawyers, it’s clear (if you read the play – gasp!) that the anarchists knew that unless they wiped out the practioners of the legal profession, their nefarious plot could never succeed. So maybe it’s a joke on the those who make anti-lawyer jokes?
December 7th, 2009 at 3:03 pm
Hey Phil, I believe the judge’s brother (Gregg Easterbrook) is a writer/columnist. I usually read his weekly football column but he often includes astronomy and other science tangents. He also writes for a bunch of other publications. You might have some similar interests to discuss (and I think he is a closet skeptic…)
December 7th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Yeah, the Tuesday Morning Quarterback column (by Gregg) is always a must read.
December 7th, 2009 at 7:00 pm
My impression is that the incessant lawyer jokes are a significant cause of cause of ethical burnout in lawyers. (Yes, I’m a law school graduate, although I was miserable in private practice and left the everyday practice of law. The jokes were a part of why.) The college students who end up going to law school are in my experience, for the most part, simply those with good grades who are a bit better at the verbal than the quantitative and who like the idea of justice. All sorts of things conspire to drive out the idealistic beliefs that most start with; the pressures of making a living in the profession can be bad, but the constant implications from friends and family that one is a whore are something no one should underestimate.
Furthermore, a good of the anger that lawyer jokes express is misplaced. Certainly, American law is a far more Byzantinely complex conglomeration than anyone would create starting from scratch. Often, the statutes contain exceptions to exceptions to exceptions. And common law is its own way of thinking, something like Talmudic scholarship. It’s a bit like a wilderness–not easily penetrable, and not something one individual can clear. A good lawyer (and there are bad ones) is like a good wilderness guide. He or she follows ambiguous indications in the law to go in the direction that the a client wants. One problem is that one sort of client often believes that you have a secret road map that you are hiding. Another sort of client believes of the jokes, and thinks you just have to %@#$ the right judge to get the result he or she wants. The real work is often invisible, so the triumph of rescuing a client is often soured by his or her complaining about the bill. You either grow a *very* thick skin, and start looking a bit like the stereotype, or you find a way out.
Seriously, the jokes are a part of the problem.
December 10th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
almost makes up for our last idiot president citing “jesus” as his greatest inspiration