This provocative question became the basis for a spirited discussion
at the 2017 meeting of the American Anthropological Association. My
first reaction, on hearing the question, was to ask, does anthropology
care whether it matters to law? As a discipline, anthropology and the
anthropology of law are producing excellent scholarship and have an
active scholarly life. But in response to this forum’s provocation article,
which clearly outlines the lack of courses on law and anthropology
in law schools, I decided that the relevant question was, why doesn’t
anthropology matter more to law than it does? The particular, most
serious concern appears to be, why are there not more law and anthropology
courses being offered in law schools? It is increasingly common
for law faculty in the United States to have PhDs as well as JDs, so why
are there so few anthropology/law PhD/JD faculty? Moreover, as there
is growing consensus that law schools instil a certain way of thinking
but lack preparation for the practice of law in reality and there is an
explosion of interest in clinical legal training, why does this educational
turn fail to provide a new role of legal anthropology, which focuses on
the practice of law, in clinical legal training?
3 „A materials way of thinking“: Chiralität in Nano-, Material- und Oberflächenforschung
