Why is law lumped in with business on this forum, or indeed anywhere, within the academic world?

Law has relatively little to do with business, really, or at least as MUCH to do with that as it does with other academic disciplines. Or is this lumping together part of the econometrics mindset that is going to inevitably perhaps swamp academia, and make only BUSINESS LAW as opposed to other kinds of law study attractive?

This, in my mind, is very myopic and ignores ALL the vast fields that law might encompass.

What about, say, human rights law? That has nothing to do with business studies, does it? Is law more of a social science? Does it form better links with social sciences, dependent upon the particular subject being studied? What about law and economics? Law and social policy? Law and...Can law exist in the academic world without being linked to something, another academic field? Does it have enough to stand on its own?

But of all the things its linked too..BUSINESS??!!!

I really wish the forum admin would have a serious rethink on this.

Maybe because people looking to do postgrad degrees in those areas have slightly different aims that most postgrads? The rank of the university seems far more important than who's teaching there for those subjects in a way that doesn't seem to be the case with other ones.

Ah but Olivia, law IS business... why else do we have ambulance chasing little oiks and QCs paid six figure salaries while emergency services languish. Methinks the law ceased to be about justice long ago.

The professional qualifications needed to pursue the practice of law in the UK are what, an LLB or BA of some kind, and then the qualifications to either be a soliciter or barrister. While a practitioner might go on to a PhD, I would suspect that people who pursue the PhD in law, even if a practitioner, do so, NOT for the extras it could bring to their practice of law, but because of its academic value.

Law as an academic subject at the PhD level is an altogether different pursuit in my opinion than pursuing law to become a practicing lawyer.

Sadly, the image of law for many is as has been described, and that is unfortunate, because there are people who are in law that do it for reasons other than money. That was the point I wanted to make by suggesting that Business and Law do not go together hand in glove, necessarily.

Again, what about human rights law? Where does that fit into a business and law focus?

Hey Olivia, whilst I totally agree that Law is such a disparate area that many aspects of it as a discipline do not fit into business; I also agree with the above post that many issues cover both Law and Business. I do not agree that the two subjects correlate massively; they are both, in essence, 'vocational' subjects. By that, I mean that they both have specific roles outside of academia.
Many people who take PhDs in business or law are likely to have been practitioners who approach their PhDs later in life, having left their respective practices. Although they do not necessarily hope the PhD will enhance their careers as practitioners, there is a 'real life' element to research in either field, that is not 'as' relevant elsewhere.

I think law potentially creeps into just about any subject that is not a hard science ( and maybe it even makes its way there...)...so instead of combining law with JUST business, why not let business just stand on its own, and let law stand on its own? Does business sound more "elite" or special when combined with law? Is there some perceived added value to law when combined with business? I just find the business and law compilation to be very irksome. That means me and my research would have to find a home on the back porch of this, or indeed, feel very orphaned and have to look for a kindly aunt or uncle in another subject to at least give us a warm meal from time to time, to avoid being totally bereft.

I have been throwing a methodological tantrum this week anyway ( to myself)--spitting methodological dummies, throwing methodological toys from my methodological pram...because of really circular and silly things in research literature that I won't even begin to try to explain other than to say that to assert that there is any methodology agreed upon in law is a fallacy. Law is a cuckoo when it comes to methodology, taking from other fields, but not often making an overt acknowledgement that it has done so. This results in a welter of confusion when trying to do higher thinking law PhD work--or perhaps an identity crisis. I am all cosied up to sociology with what I am doing...