There are many professions where one person can eke out a life in a small town. One physician … one car mechanic … one painter, etc. There is one, where that is impossible: one lawyer. The one lawyer would starve to death.
It seems to me that lawyers are trained to argue so they need someone to argue with. Perhaps that is part of the problem in our politics today. We have mostly lawyers as politicians. Maybe we should be voting pastors and rabbis into office. Maybe we should consider more psychologists and teachers. What we don’t need any more of are lawyers.
I am reminded of all this because of an article I read in the Wall Street Journal today where mice were being used to decide the benefits of a time-based diet where eating at certain times of the day was better than eating at others. One of the comments was a question about why humans weren’t used in the study … it certainly seems safe enough to try this on humans. After all, there were no restrictions on calories or even food type. It was only about when you ate during the day.
That reminded me of a similar question asked by some: why don’t they use lawyers for these medical experiments. The justification for using lawyers was based upon three arguments:
- There are far too many lawyers in the US,
- Researchers are far less likely to form an emotional bond with lawyers, and finally
- There are some things even a rat will not do.
Seems reasonable to me.