“What do you even research in law?”
This is the question I’ve been regularly getting ever since I moved here. I wasn’t aware that the law is seen as such an “unresearchable” area. Probably my bad. Being surrounded by lawyers in the UK, I thought what we were doing made sense, and honestly, I never really questioned it. But in Singapore, being surrounded by engineers and other sciencey types, my poor little subject has been subjected to so many questions, and as a lawyer, frankly, I’m not doing a great job defending it.
Usually, when people find out that I do law, or maritime law,
they act surprised. They ask why. I thought it was common knowledge that
Singapore is one of the best in shipping, but clearly not. I’ve met some
Singaporeans who didn’t even know that their country excels in shipping. Then,
when they hear what exactly I do for my PhD research, they act impressed.
“Autonomous ships” and “cyber risk” are two fancy phrases that sound “unknown”
enough to make people feel intrigued for about three seconds. But then, some of
them actually work in cyber security. So, do we work on the same thing then?
God, no.
Another challenge is explaining what exactly I do
with my research topic. You know how they say, “If you can explain your job to
your grandma, then you’ve succeeded”? That’s how I feel with the engineers I
interact with here. Then comes the million-dollar question: What do you even
research in law?
What they really mean is basically, “Aren’t laws just rules?
Is there even room for research?” At first, I was just surprised by that
question. Then it got to a point where I started to feel offended. I tell them
that we use books, regulations, case law, and articles for our research. Then
they ask, “So what’s the difference between that and a review article?” It’s
different in that you make your own commentary, argument and criticism. Then
someone asks, “But how do you test that?” Apparently, to them, anyone can just
say anything. But in law, you’re also bound by existing legal frameworks—you
can’t just talk nonsense. Still, it’s getting harder and harder to justify
something I’ve been doing practically my whole life.
I’m aware that all these questions mostly come from
ignorance. When an engineer starts talking about their research, to my ears, it
mostly sounds like “la la la la,” because honestly, I give very little shit
about it. But I never had such a problem in the UK before. I mean, if the law is
questioned for being “unworthy” of research, I think most social sciences
should face the same thing. But then again, some of them have experiments and
surveys and stuff. That leaves the law a bit of a lone wolf, I guess.
You know what they say—I’m not angry, I’m just disappointed. Lol.

Comments
Post a Comment