Both professions require writing detailed, overly specific, reasonably watertight arguments that will be read by only a handful of people, so that tracks

▲

datakan an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Arguments so watertight that none of them ever agree with each other and have argued for thousands of years without a resolution to even the most basic of questions.

▲

programjames an hour ago | parent [-]

The appearance of a logical argument is easier to achieve and often good enough for their purposes (publishing papers, winning lawsuits).

	▲	mothballed 33 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Connections are far more important IMO. The opinion itself is there for the plebs so they don't revolt when the high-IQ trickery flagrantly mismatches the plain language of the constitution. The courts are really the main thing nowadays that can provide legitimacy to the acts of the state since it doesn't follow the people or the documents authorizing it.

▲

SoftTalker an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Using a vocabulary that is known only to themselves.

▲

palmotea an hour ago | parent [-]

> Using a vocabulary that is known only to themselves.

So? Almost all professions have jargon known only to themselves. You think most people have any clue what a garbage collector is?

	▲	antonvs an hour ago \| parent [-]
		A monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors, after all.