To anybody out there who's currently reading law - how much is studying law like studying history, is it pretty much a case of you need the same skills which are applied to different areas or do they vary in style alot.
I'm asking this because i pretty much decided to go into law because i've always been good at and found history easy, not like remembering dates easy but i've always found writing history essays with good arguements and analysis comes quite naturally.
A passion for debating helps, especially if you want to be a barrister.
I dont think law is like history at all. I did A Level history and first year degree history modules and I'm doing law now. The only similarity I can think of is referring to cases and remembering facts which really makes it no different than remembering formulas in chemistry I hadnt thought it was like history at all before you said.
Depends what type of law you are doing. Constitutional and admin is a lot of politics reasoning and caselaw and bits of history, contract is mainly looking at statutes and caselaw and applying it to problems. Some of it is memory a lot of it is reasoning. I really dont see it as resembling history that closely as a subject though.
u probably have a much better idea of what studying law at unis like than me but i've found the skills you need for history are pretty much the ability to reason; construct an arguement and take account of other historians contrasting views and to remember lots of facts to back up ur arguement. Maybe scottish advanced higher history which im doing is alot different in style to a level. I'm doing a level physics now and i find the style of it alot different to higher, which i was doing last year.
I definitely wouldnt have said that it is similar to history you have to look at things in a completely different context. You cant really twist the facts of a case as much as you can twist history.