wug wrote:Babel wrote:
I think my biggest struggle with law is that our "analytical and discussion" parts of the thesis usually also just consists of stating facts. It's never really about making your own conclusions or anything but more like "this law says x. In this article this author says that x means x+y. The courts agree with that in case1, and in case2 they expand on this, so now it's x+y+z. Therefore when reading law saying x, we have to remember x-y-z."
But that's just reading?
I just don't get it.
you should ctrl + c ctrl + v like sandra borch did
tempting...