As someone who is a law graduate working in what might be called public interest law (asylum & immigration law) I agree with your analysis to the extent that if someone considered they were equally well suited to both types of work and ambivalent to a which path to follow this would be a good argument to consider commercial law.
However, while the academic skills of a commercial and publicly funded lawyer might be the same (both might go to Harvard or Oxford and study similar subjects in similar ways) - the specific non-academic skills needed to do these jobs and their actual competencies of the people involved with them vary wildly, such that I would doubt that a successful commercial lawyer is likely to be a successful public interest lawyer and vice versa. (with some exceptions of course—in particular the very top barristers, the british equivalent of trial lawyers often handle both public interest and commercial work because of their unique skill set).
In the nicest possible way, the vast majority of people I work with, i suspect would not succeed in the commercial world—they would not find the work intrinsically motivating or interesting enough to maintain a high level of conscientiousness—they would lack the specific social/extraversion skill-set necessary to succeed in high pressure business environments and so on. I certainly know from trying it out in summer placements that I would not succeed there.
I am sure that in many cases, the vice-versa is also true, many successful commercial law friends would find the day to day work in my area extremely frustrating and would not have the skills to succeed here either (though I suspect it is easier to adapt this way—plenty of lawyers do move from commercial to public interest work—not many the other way at all, at least in the UK).
So while I think this is a good argument for law students considering their future to bear in mind, I suspect that in many cases it is on the edge because you are overestimating the chance for which a student will succeed in two very different careers.
(Though, I recognise there is a risk that I am overgeneralising from my own and what I know of my colleagues experiences).
Edited spelling
Having been an investment banker for many years working with top flight partners in Magic Circle firms in London my particular concern is that it can be very corrosive to long term morality, particularly as you rise to partner level. The moral choices you are often asked by clients to assist them in making in favour of financial return would I imagine affect most people. With the hours that such jobs require, minimising contact with an effective altruism community I would worry about a corporate lawyer losing their commitment to effective altruism as other moral guidance came to the fore.
With the hours that such jobs require, minimising contact with an effective altruism community I would worry about a corporate lawyer losing their commitment to effective altruism as other moral guidance came to the fore.
Interesting to have you take on this as someone who’s been there David. People are familiar with these concerns of value drift, but I think underrate their application to themselves, because it’s hard to imagine one’s own values changing at a time when one’s very absorbed in them. Nonetheless, many effective altruists are currently in a very favourable setting for EA ideas (being students with several EA friends), and it’d be natural for some to drop off when they move to the sort of environment you describe.
That is a well known bias isn’t it? I forget the scientific name of it—but its part of our tendency to see the world as fixed and ourselves in control of our actions that when we see ourselves in the future—we fail to imagine changes in our personality and values but instead project ourselves into that time as we currently are, relatedly we consistently underestimate how much we have changed already and how different we are from the people we were in the past because we are bad at noticing how our values and personalities change over time.
As someone who is a law graduate working in what might be called public interest law (asylum & immigration law) I agree with your analysis to the extent that if someone considered they were equally well suited to both types of work and ambivalent to a which path to follow this would be a good argument to consider commercial law.
However, while the academic skills of a commercial and publicly funded lawyer might be the same (both might go to Harvard or Oxford and study similar subjects in similar ways) - the specific non-academic skills needed to do these jobs and their actual competencies of the people involved with them vary wildly, such that I would doubt that a successful commercial lawyer is likely to be a successful public interest lawyer and vice versa. (with some exceptions of course—in particular the very top barristers, the british equivalent of trial lawyers often handle both public interest and commercial work because of their unique skill set).
In the nicest possible way, the vast majority of people I work with, i suspect would not succeed in the commercial world—they would not find the work intrinsically motivating or interesting enough to maintain a high level of conscientiousness—they would lack the specific social/extraversion skill-set necessary to succeed in high pressure business environments and so on. I certainly know from trying it out in summer placements that I would not succeed there.
I am sure that in many cases, the vice-versa is also true, many successful commercial law friends would find the day to day work in my area extremely frustrating and would not have the skills to succeed here either (though I suspect it is easier to adapt this way—plenty of lawyers do move from commercial to public interest work—not many the other way at all, at least in the UK).
So while I think this is a good argument for law students considering their future to bear in mind, I suspect that in many cases it is on the edge because you are overestimating the chance for which a student will succeed in two very different careers.
(Though, I recognise there is a risk that I am overgeneralising from my own and what I know of my colleagues experiences). Edited spelling
Having been an investment banker for many years working with top flight partners in Magic Circle firms in London my particular concern is that it can be very corrosive to long term morality, particularly as you rise to partner level. The moral choices you are often asked by clients to assist them in making in favour of financial return would I imagine affect most people. With the hours that such jobs require, minimising contact with an effective altruism community I would worry about a corporate lawyer losing their commitment to effective altruism as other moral guidance came to the fore.
Interesting to have you take on this as someone who’s been there David. People are familiar with these concerns of value drift, but I think underrate their application to themselves, because it’s hard to imagine one’s own values changing at a time when one’s very absorbed in them. Nonetheless, many effective altruists are currently in a very favourable setting for EA ideas (being students with several EA friends), and it’d be natural for some to drop off when they move to the sort of environment you describe.
That is a well known bias isn’t it? I forget the scientific name of it—but its part of our tendency to see the world as fixed and ourselves in control of our actions that when we see ourselves in the future—we fail to imagine changes in our personality and values but instead project ourselves into that time as we currently are, relatedly we consistently underestimate how much we have changed already and how different we are from the people we were in the past because we are bad at noticing how our values and personalities change over time.
End of History Illusion sounds like what you’re looking for.