“You can get lost when standing still too.” These words of Edward Stachura are a metaphor of the main proposition of the paper. It aims to suggest a way to “set the ball rolling” by designing the paths of education for lawyers anew, with civil society in mind, and not just thinking of the requirements of legal training. Lawyers with knowledge in the field of information technology, interdisciplinary lawyers for business, lawyers-guardians of the rule of law and justice all need study programmes to take their predispositions, goals, skills, and abilities – all at different levels – into account. The purpose of the article is to shed light on the extra-legal barriers hindering the taking of a practical step ahead. The author shows three main ways of educating lawyers and explains why they are so important and why they call for changes in study programmes. Next, the author points to the obstacles faced by reformers and suggests exploring their actual impact on education in law and the level thereof.

Academics and faculty members are entangled in many interests. Selfless science for cognitive purposes is a thing of the past. There is a constant game of the power over knowledge. Apart from scientists, many entities with various interests are participants of the game. They are: politicians, officials, academic administration, research sponsors, accreditation agencies, publishers, resort scientific institutes, industry, business. The scientists themselves sometimes work for the truth and sometimes they work for profit; they create knowledge which is public property, or when they are employed commercially, e.g. by the industry, they create private knowledge. This paper presents five factors which may contribute to restricting the cognitive autonomy of the scientists.

A Review: Jerzy Stelmach, Sztuka manipulacji, Warszawa 2018

Jerzy Stelmach, Sztuka manipulacji, Warszawa 2018

Current legal studies curricula in Poland are still “analogue”, academic teachers themselves are still largely “analogue”, and students and articling students live in a different world: they are “digital natives”, in other words, “homo zappiens”, meaning “constantly clicking”. On the other hand, curricula and programmes are saturated almost exclusively with legal doctrines, but the market needs law graduates in economy, also with the knowledge of market, business and enterprise opinion principles, including special soft skills, completely different from those required for centuries in courts. The author presents arguments for the necessary reform of legal studies in connection with the above phenomena.

AAktualne programy studiów prawniczych w Polsce mają wciąż charakter „analogowy”, nauczyciele akademiccy w dużej części są nadal „analogowi”, a studenci i aplikanci zamieszkują inny świat: to „digitalni (cyfrowi) tubylcy”, inaczej mówiąc to homo zappiens, czyli „nieustannie klikający”. Z drugiej strony programy są przesycone prawie wyłącznie dogmatyką prawa, a rynek potrzebuje absolwentów prawa do gospodarki, także z wiedzą o zasadach działania rynku, biznesu i przedsiębiorstw, w tym ze specjalnymi miękkimi kompetencjami, zupełnie innymi niż wymagane są od wieków w sądach. Autorka przedstawia argumenty na rzecz koniecznej reformy studiów prawniczych w związku z powyższymi zjawiskami.