Ann Althouse asked her Constitutional Law students to identify cases that did (or did not) exemplify "empathy" on their exam. Try it for yourself and see how you do.
UPDATE: Here's the "winner."
I disagree with those saying Althouse's exam question was "ridiculous", "stupid and insulting", or even "narcissistic and oblivious". To give a thoughtful answer to her question you must know the cases very well. If you really put in 15 hours a day, 7 days a week to prepare for a con law exam, then this question would have allowed you to separate yourself from the others that merely studied the black-letter law.
"What better way to test that hypothesis then by having students try to define empathy as a legal concept."
"Those who think this is a bad way to test Con Law have a point. Which somewhat undermines empathy as a legitimate qualification for a SCOTUS Justice."
"thoughtful answers" don't get good grades.
15 hours a day, 7 days a week
I have encountered more of my share of students at the top of their class that could recite verbage from text books, do complex computations, etc that had not yet learned to think.
Can you refer me to one of Obama's well designed con law exams.
I have to ask: What were you doing 15 hours a day, seven days a week, for the an entire semester? That seems like more time than is necessary to complete the assigned work. How did the semester turn our for you? I'm not implying anything; I'm just curious.
If you have a comment about spelling, typos, or format errors, please e-mail the poster directly rather than posting a comment.
Comment Policy: We reserve the right to edit or delete comments, and in extreme cases to ban commenters, at our discretion. Comments must be relevant and civil (and, especially, free of name-calling). We think of comment threads like dinner parties at our homes. If you make the party unpleasant for us or for others, we'd rather you went elsewhere. We're happy to see a wide range of viewpoints, but we want all of them to be expressed as politely as possible.
We realize that such a comment policy can never be evenly enforced, because we can't possibly monitor every comment equally well. Hundreds of comments are posted every day here, and we don't read them all. Those we read, we read with different degrees of attention, and in different moods. We try to be fair, but we make no promises.
And remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.