•  
  •  
 
Canadian Journal of Law and Technology

Keywords

Algorithmic Decision-Making, analytical jurisprudence, artificial intelligence, Robot Judge, Classical Legal Thought, Conceptualism, Formalism, Christopher Columbus Langdell, Oliver Wendall Holmes Jr.

Abstract

This review article engages with the idea of a ‘‘legal singularity”, which has been developed by Abdi Aidid and Benjamin Alarie in their book, The Legal Singularity: How Artificial Intelligence Can Make Law Radically Better.

The legal singularity describes a legal system in the future that harnesses algorithmic computation to facilitate a ‘‘stable and complete legal order, capable of addressing and resolving practically all types of legal uncertainty in real time and on demand”. Aidid and Alarie believe algorithmic computation will achieve this promise in an interdependent dual process. On one hand, algorithms will structure the law with conceptual standardization. On the other hand, algorithms will be able to apply these concepts to predict how law should apply in specific factual matrices. By harnessing these algorithmic processes, the authors allege that legal systems will be able to achieve ‘‘functional completeness” and ‘‘practical certainty”, ultimately making the law ‘‘radically better”. However, not everyone agrees. The idea of a legal singularity has been subject to much critique.

This review article situates the legal singularity within analytical jurisprudence discourse to elucidate what it will mean for the concept of law. The legal singularity is shown to be a futurist vision of law with theoretical lineage in classical legal thought, expressing conceptualism and formalism. As such, the legal singularity inherits some of the same theoretical shortcomings as classical legal thought. Simultaneously, this review illustrates how many critiques of Aidid and Alarie are overstated or misguided.

Share

COinS