Q: what is your research field?
Answer: American method of history, the relationship between law and society, of my inheritance (wills and trusts) is also very interested.
Q: is there a universal view that, students "thinking like a lawyer as" culture America law school, is it? You cultivate students' goal is what?
Answer: I think to some extent this is true, but it is not my teaching, I put this to others. For me personally, I hope that the role of law in our society and other societies in the students understand.
Q: your graduation from the Law School of University of Chicago, before entering the Standford law school, served as a lawyer. So, these practice experience for you as a teacher and researcher have help?
Answer: the practice of my experience is very helpful to me as a teacher, it at least makes me on the legal practice and legal operation have some understanding. Because I mainly engaged in trust estate business, it is helpful to me in these aspects of the study, but my study also involves other aspects.
Q: judges and lawyers have the same legal skills?
Answer: in the USA, the judge only trial lawyers, not through individual training.
Q: in China people know American constitution "decentralization" mechanism, namely, administrative, judicial and legislative independence and equality is the basic political system. In your opinion, have changes in the relationship between the power? If so, will the independence and authority, you think they behave in a judicial this level?
Answer: of course, the balance of power is often change. In the last century, the administrative power of the branch have the advantage, but this is at the expense of the congress at the expense of. However, the power of the court to be maintained, so, in this sense, the power and independence even increased.
Q: have you ever been to China?
Answer: have been to China, is an academic visit. I have been to Wuhan, Shanghai and Beijing, but didn't come to Harbin.
Q: you have published a large number of academic journals and several books, mostly for academic readers. What prompted you to write this book "for the general reader America law"?
A: I wrote a lot of books for the general reader, I think I work for all levels of readers. I try to avoid speaking those obscure words. My book is mainly for the scholars, this is basically correct, but only because these readers interested, not because other people cannot read or don't understand.
Q: on a personal sense of achievement, "compared to other achievements American law" this book and you have, it has what kind of position?
A: I'm glad this book has achieved some success. But I was not accustomed to choose one of my most take it as a great honour in my book. I am very happy to be America Society for literature and science, and a member America historical society, America historical society in minority historians can be considered a good writer. I think, law professor only I just learned, which I was very proud to award six times, but I really feel I don't quite match with these honors.
Q: Mrs. Freedman had been China?
Answer: yes. If I went abroad, she is always with me. She came China two times, we have been to Hongkong two times.
Q: please tell us a little about Mrs. Freedman and your child's situation.
A: Mrs. Freedman is a PhD candidate at the University of California, she is the study of psychiatry. She has a little psychological consultation and treatment center, but now has not done. I have two daughters, the eldest daughter is a professor of mathematics at the University of San Diego, the younger daughter married a Standford Business School professor, we have three grandchildren.
Q: what do you like doing in your spare time?
A: I like reading and watching movies. I like classical music and like to play the piano for fun.

Laurence.M. Freedman Professor

Laurence.M., Professor Freedman, Professor Marion Rice Kirkwood America Law School of Stanford University, past president USA Institute of history, law and society American association chairman, President of the international society for the sociology of Law Research Committee, is a enjoy high international prestige law historian. Laurence.M., Professor Freedman graduated from the Law School of University of Chicago in 1951 USA, doctorate in law, after graduation, worked in the Law School of University of Wisconsin and Saint Louis University School of law, 1968 at the Stanford University School of law. Laurence.M. Freedman Professor, main research field is the relationship between law and society, history of law, the trust property, which will be studied and the famous legal history as a branch of history, he wrote many influential academic monographs. From 1973 "history" was published in 2003 twentieth Century USA to "the USA method", his work has become the outstanding teaching, law recognized at the same time, he published academic influence of papers, in legal history, the relationship between law and society, trust estate areas enjoy a high academic reputation. Laurence.M. professor Freedman from 1976 to 2001 has won six important awards, including the 1976 Triennial Book Award of the Order of the Coif, a 1992 law and Society Association awarded the Harry Kalven Prize, for Distinguished Research on Law and Society, and American Bar Foundation Research Award 2001.

III

Laurence M Freedman (Lawrence M.Friedman), was born in 1930 in Chicago America. In 1951 from the University of Chicago law school J.D degree and the qualification as a lawyer. In the two years after the actual business at the law firm, in 1957 into the academic circles. He has appointed faculty in Saint Louis University, University of wisconsin. Since 1968 has served as
Professor of Stanford University law school, and served as chairman of America society, law and social law society. His research field is very wide, including USA law, law and social change, America law, criminal history, law and social science, sociology of law, constitutional law, administrative law, property law, contract law, trust law and social welfare law.
Freedman's main works are: "America contract law" (1965), "USA law history" (1973 American year's top law award Scribes Award), "legal system: a social science perspective" (1975, by the American once every three years by the Publishing Book Award), "law and society introduction" (1977), "the general justice" (1985), "the Republic of choice" (1990). He and Mccauley (Stewart Macauley) Co edited the "law and behavioral science" is the USA sociology of law, synthesizer, the best guide is still in this field. Because of the limited space and data, we are just the "legal system", "America law history" two books in the main view. Freedman in the "legal system" a book on popular western scholars simply "traditional analytical framework of modern law" and a single evolutionary model has been challenged. After Freedman, the analysis of national culture and the sub culture clearly pointed out, law culture with characteristics of modern tools of orthodoxy, which leads to the instability of the law. Freedman argues that the basic factors in contemporary USA law culture: distributed power system; Princes: the tool theory; the requirement of rights consciousness etc.. E this view actually has hidden the postmodern jurisprudence premise of the formation and development of the. Freedman analysis of the various types of cultural pluralism. He thinks, structure and culture as the standard classification, a method of cultural pluralism and plane perpendicular to the pluralism of culture. Thus, culture can be divided into different levels. A level is the ordinary people of attitudes and values (also known as law culture external). In most societies, mass culture method is not uniform, and one of the most important problem is how to ensure the legitimacy in the multivariate case the difficult to mutual understanding and recognition, respect and recognition method that set up the system, attitude. Compared with the method of culture external, internal culture of law legal family attitudes and values have been paid more and more attention and study
The. Freedman mainly from the perspective of legal reasoning inherent law culture and society. He thinks, Europe and the United States Court of appeals role have a common characteristic, that is open to the public after the written opinions of reasoning. These written comments not only solve the parties dispute rulings, and clarify the reason and justification of the case according to the. Legal reasoning is a formal expression refers to the act of specific reason, must have the authority of. However, not all law are proof obligations, because two kind of legitimacy in law is the "primary legitimacy" and "derivative legitimacy", the former is not justified sacred, the latter is the need to prove the secular authority -- including general authority and specific authority. Specific authority must use legal reasoning. 1
Freedman according to the legal system of closed and open and legal system to accept innovation or not, the legal system is divided into four kinds of ideal. And think that these four kinds of system, in line with the ideal type of four kinds of legal argumentation, reflect some aspects of legal culture in a diverse society.
The first type of legal system is a closed set of premises, do not admit the principle of innovation. Conservative single biblical Book Religions close to the ideal type, especially if you don't believe that the new vision. Deduced that he called legal theology.
The second system is called system of legal science, because the concept of legal science of legal system and its close. In this type of premise of legal reasoning, standard is closed, however this system to accept innovation.
The third category includes premise of open standards, but not really accept the new system. This is a kind of common types, can be referred to as the common law. Traditional or customary law system are such.
The fourth category is an innovative, open system standards, can be referred to as the tool theory system. In this system, some of the "judge" can not "law" rules and decision. These "judge" can appeal to a wide range of social standard, can change the rules or the application according to the requirements of standards. This system of argumentation like Marx. Webb called the "substantive rationality", namely, the judge is based on "ethics, utilitarianism and other convenient rules and political maxim." Rather than "from the abstract meaning of a logical summary...... Criterion." Freedman thinks that the real world there are two different legal system close to this type. He said that this kind of classification for the legitimacy of the revolution (as in the early days of the revolution Castro's Cuba or 1918 the Soviet Union, the new government sometimes remove the legal system of old) and welfare legitimacy.
Freedman put the law system for the understanding of the overall system and the actual process of mutual association. He stressed that all kinds of social research to create rules behind the formal structure consists of the rules of the power, and the effect rules of anti in their behaviour in society. He thus created the term "act" and take it as the focus of analysis. Freedman think the law refers to "all actions have the authority in the law system". "Launch" a Book Legal System themes, basically uses the methods of sociology, analysis the influence of behavior system for individual action and social impact on the formation of law behavior. Freedman think, function of society is mainly realized by sanctions, indirect effects and intrinsic value: the role of social law are mainly through the lawsuit, but litigation request this complex process and legal culture in the play. Freedman think, the process is through the social environment of the law system of "input" system to the input material "treatment", as a result of the "output", output to the external "influence" and "effect", and on the basis of social environment on the system of "feedback" and other steps.
Freedman also discussed the relationship between the law change and social change in the structure of the. The origin and results in his movements are classified as standard, points out four possible ways: one is the change of the legal system of external origin, namely in the community, but only affects the legal system and as the bullets in the end there.
The two is originated in the variation law of external, but through it (with or without some kind of internal processing) to affect legal system external, namely in the society. The three is the change began in the legal system of internal, may have also occurred in the
The legal system of internal.
Freedman believes that, in general, law changes reflect and depends on the social changes, also have important practice but use legal social changes in contemporary society. According to the change of main performance for the alteration or destruction of certain actions and action to look forward to "negative" as well as the specification control social activities. These norms can be divided "objectivity rule" and "discretionary rule". For the market economy, the objective rules indispensable clear; discretionary rules is not clear perhaps more substantially open, but the loss of efficiency, but also easily lead to corruption. ②
In the "America law history" a book, study USA legal history Freedman made pioneering contributions. Freedman was very unhappy America jurisprudence on America legal history of contempt, because he thinks, if do not know their own legal traditions, not innovation. ⑧
Freedman believed that different regions (countries) have their own unique legal culture. The cultural history of legal America is unique. Because of the formation of legal culture American has many source: British law, French law, German law, Italy law, Spain etc.. The reason this Law in the history of the legal culture USA presentation of a pluralistic form.
Freedman thinks, "legal history should not is the study of ancient fossils, but those who show to all social development". It is, he insists on using a sociological approach to the study of legal history -- the legal history of dynamic, and not just to study the static legal system. Indeed, Freedman put USA legal history development process as the central and local, state, country and country between social economic system of separation and reunification, centrifugal force and centripetal force, identity and diversity of interaction and mutual selection process.
Is the use of this method, Freedman explored the origin America method (he thinks America law originated in the colonial period), near the nineteenth Century American method, as well as from USA revolution to judge Kent (1776 1847) died during the period of the American method. Finally he discusses America act twentieth Century. Notably, Freedman uses a large number of secondary analysis method to find the major problems American legal history.
Freedman's works and theory in American law circles pay attention to quite. He observed a problem sharp and profound, unique view and distinct, and the style of Shang Mingxiao, whose theory is also the amiable and easy of approach. One of the critics as opposed to his view of the said: "Freedman is like a smart lawyer, has excellent social insight, reliable knowledge, surprisingly have wide learning and a retentive memory, plus some occasional 'theory'" Freedman sketched a portrait does not only so much and interesting.