"Meaning Comes From Observing Things in Context"

During the first day of Evidence, Nesson, in characteristic cerebral fashion, paused, placed his hand on his chin, looked up at the ceiling of the Ames Courtroom, pondered, laughed quietly, and stated: "Meaning Comes From Observing Things in Context."

An interesting statement, indeed! But, what did Nesson mean? What meaning? What context? This is Evidence; not Philosophy. Even more, wasn’t the precise purpose behind the promulgation of the Federal Rules of Evidence to move beyond the complex, confusing, and conflicting evidentiary disputes of common law that resulted from 50 different State "contexts"?

On another note, why is Kenny Rogers’ "The Gambler" still playing in my head? Is Nesson really a brilliant mathematician and legal scholar, or is he a reincarnated philosopher of centuries past who speaks in mumbo jumbo without much substance? Questions like these raced through my mind that first day. I contemplated dropping the course. After all, isn’t law school designed to give us the skills to pass the Bar?

It wasn’t too late to drop Evidence, and I could register in another course without much trouble. Really, what is this quirky professor thinking – (1) no structured syllabus, (2) odd 8-person group projects, (3) My Cousin Vinny and The Verdict, (4) a multi-media monolith in the middle of the Ames Courtroom, and (5) after-hours social functions? Some of these things don’t even involve evidence for crying out loud!

Nevertheless, I decided to remain in the class, for it was only three weeks and three credits. And, boy am I glad I stayed. The meaning of the class became apparent as the class progressed. Nesson’s eccentric nature and bizarre structure animate the rhetorical statement he posed the first day.

(1) With no syllabus, Nesson teaches more than adherence to the Federal Rules; he teaches mastery of them because it is on the fringes where the close cases are won.

(2) Through the projects he teaches more than final-exam individualism; he assigns detailed, complicated group-projects since effective lawyering demands team-work. (3) With Vinny and Verdict, Nesson provides more than Supreme Court and law review rhetoric concerning evidence; he furnishes films, both humorous and sincere, regarding the application of evidence, for application of the rules is as important as knowledge and familiarity with them. (4) Nesson rebukes the traditional Socratic or lecture teaching modules; he utilizes a multi-media monolith, replete with a CD player, VCR, computer, video camera, and more, because students learn and communicate in distinct ways. (5) And finally, when the 12:00 bell rings, class isn’t over; Nesson organizes after-hours functions for students to meet in a social setting, for as Aristotle observed, we are "social animals," not simply automaton researchers.

Each of Nesson’s procedures singularly may be unconventional but each is effective in its own right. For a while I was content with that view of the class.

It did not take long, however, for me to come to appreciate an even more fulfilling meaning. A few days later Nesson showed "Zoom", the repeating mathematical design, on the big screen. Many students, including myself, chuckled and thought, "Here goes Nesson again on one his tangents."

I watched the design repeat itself over and over again. After a few repetitions, my viewpoint suddenly changed. Originally, I focused on the individual geometric shapes, but then my perspective retreated and allowed me to view how each of the parts contribute to a whole. In short, there are two ways to view the scheme – (a) focus on each of the component parts individually since each has meaning itself; and (b) take a step back and look at the component parts together, as creating an even more fulfilling whole.

At that point, I realized that this class, too, could be viewed from different perspectives. As indicated, it is possible to view Nesson’s class in terms of individual eccentric methods. However, like "Zoom," the combination of those methods creates an entirely new picture: Nesson isn’t merely teaching us evidence to pass the Bar. . . he isn’t even just teaching us to be team players. . . he is teaching us how to be lawyers in a world full of obligations, responsibilities, ethics, and people. That is, after all, the world of an advocate.

You were right, Professor, Meaning Does Indeed Come From Observing Things In Context. I just never thought that a boring repetitious mathematical formula would be the trigger to make me see that perspective.