Kampf um die kritische Kritik

Two controversial book reviews have sparked a debate about the style and lack of style of legal reviews. In some cases, the intensity of the (undoubtedly relentless) criticism was condemned across the board, the formal errors of the dissertation under review, which were traced in detail, were dismissed as irrelevant, the reviewers were accused of misogyny and special treatment was demanded for young academics in the reviewing process. All in all, this is a vivid example of how a less than productive culture of indignation is also spreading in the academic world. The adapted review practice demanded as a »responsibility towards young academics« is, in any case, not a one-way street if it is not considered inadequate for academia from the outset. Anyone who is unwilling, unable or too busy to present a formally reasonably unobjectionable text in an academic qualification procedure and subsequent publication should not demand academic »puppy protection«. Incidentally, this should not be an alarmingly high expectation for today's doctoral or post-doctoral students either. You don't need Feuerbach, Savigny or Laband 2.0 to be successful in law either. However, one thing is certainly required: humility before the craft and humility before the subject matter.