Junno is poised to graduate magna cum laude in a week’s time.
“Philosophy is the best pre-law” is perhaps one of the selling points for Philosophy in the eyes of aspiring law students looking for a course that will help them gain the skills needed in law school. The common perception is that philosophy provides one with the skills in logic, critical thinking, and reading comprehension. After thousands of pages and lectures from the works of Plato, Russell, Wittgenstein, Rawls and a wide range of philosophers, one will no doubt acquire these aforementioned skills. Another reason why it is the best pre-law is perhaps because the course tackles several philosophers of law that will allow one to understand the nature of law. Furthermore, perhaps because the nature of related concepts such as justice, politics, and morality is extensively explored. So, is philosophy the best pre-law? After my four years of studying in the department, I would agree not totally because of the aforementioned reasons; in my opinion the answer is more complicated than that.
A Double Take on the Concept of Law
What, then, sets UP analytic Philosophy apart from other courses in UP? The first that comes to mind is deeper delving into abstract concepts that are usually applied in cases of law. Throughout my years in the department, I am able to further analyze problems in distributive justice, individual liberty, and human rights. In my opinion no other course thinks about these concepts in a much deeper sense. We tend to take them for granted especially in their applications, often focusing on outcomes and data. But what backs the data? We use the terms lawful, legal, or illegal loosely, as if it is something unquestioned and widely accepted. How can we really say such action is just on the basis that it is lawful? Is lawful equal to just anyway? Is it something that comes natural to all humans, or is just posited by lawmakers and society? These are the things we think about in philosophy. Sure, other courses may offer information regarding law in itself, but its nature is not extensively explored. Yet, we are taught that before delving into such details, deeper meaning into abstract concepts is needed. In this way, we may know the relationship between law and justice, law and morality, or law and discrimination. By then, we can identify if a legal system is by nature an oppressive tool or something that keeps order in society. That is why in my thesis named “The Distribution of Opportunities and Resources Through AI Algorithms: A Comparative Analysis of Rawlsian Liberalism vs. Nozickian Libertarianism Frameworks,” I am able to apply a debate in distributive justice to suggest how to regulate the use of AI so that it is not discriminatory whilst maintaining individual rights.
Junno defending his thesis entitled “The Distribution of Opportunities and Resources Through AI Algorithms: A Comparative Analysis of Rawlsian Liberalism vs. Nozickian Libertarianism Frameworks.”
Legal systems themselves are subject to further analysis. One of my most important lessons from philosophy comes from a disillusionment of the concept of law. Judges’ decisions can be, as J.L. Austin coins, performative utterances, disguised as something purely objective while hiding their true subjective and biased nature (Hilbay, 2010). It was then wherein my initial perspective on law totally changed. We can indeed classify law as an oppressive tool, if used to hide biased intentions. Legal decisions reflect further the psychology, sociology, and politics in the court room. ‘Guilty’ or ‘not guilty’ become utterances when the facts don’t tell a definitive story. By then, judges make the decision that is totally subjective to their own understanding and biases. This is an important lesson for an upcoming law student. The tedious readings a law student will go through is not in fact outside of further philosophical investigation.
Law and Ethics
Ethics was one of my favorite subjects simply because of the case studies that we analyzed. Here, I am not yet talking about the relationship between law and ethics, just ethical cases that are conventionally analyzed in a philosophy class (e.g. trolley problem, mind fission, etc.). These are interesting to me because when you really think about it, you get to analyze from all perspectives. One of my favorite cases was Bernard Williams’ body swapping thought experiment. If two people swap minds and one was to be tortured, is the tortured body the one more affected? Or is it the tortured mind? Both perspectives should be taken into account.
What does this have to do with law? If I were a lawmaker, lawyer, or an adjudicator of law, would I not want to also know the ethical implications of my decisions to all sides and perspectives? This is the most important lesson that ethics has taught me, and I find it extremely helpful as an incoming law student. We cannot make ethical decisions that only benefit one side, all sides need to be taken into account especially if we are debating human rights and distributive justice. Through these lenses, we are able to see that law and ethics are indeed connected. I can even say that those who make decisions regarding law should have classes in ethics so that they know the ethical implications of their decisions.
Junno presenting his paper on whether we have moral obligations to future generations at Durungawan: The CSSP Undergraduate Conference 2024.
What of the tools needed for law school?
To the eager undergraduate who has plans to get into law school, the common perception to Philosophy seems appealing enough, but let me start by saying that any course in UP may already provide these said skills. University students are inculcated through the university wide “GE subjects” that instill in students these said skills. Philo 1 in itself is an introduction of what we study in Philosophy, and is enough to learn basic logic and critical reasoning skills. The vast amount of materials used in Soc Sci 1 and Eng 13 are more than enough to establish a wide knowledge about societal problems and greatly improve higher reading comprehension levels. Speech 30 trains the students to be orators that can clearly and coherently organize and speak their thoughts. I owe much of my skills to these said GE subjects, to which I used in my law school applications and exams. I will no doubt use the skills from these subjects in my challenges in law school.
Junno at the Emmanuel Q. Fernando Philosophy Undergraduate Conference 2025, of which he was among the organizers.
Though, I must say that four years in philosophy does indeed take these skills to another level. We take more logic classes (Philo 12, Philo 104) that are for more intermediate and advanced logicians. The hundreds to thousands of case studies that we tackled in bioethics, political philosophy, philosophy of law, and etc. exercise the critical reasoning skills. The thousands of pages given to us to read Plato, Russell, Descartes, and more are enough to improve our reading comprehension skills. You will read from different styles of writing from different times. Lastly, the teachers encourage active participation through Socratic dialogue, through which some of my favorite professors, Sir Henry Fernando and Sir Ato Manaloto, asked a lot of interesting questions in class.
Junno (5th from the left) poses with his Philo 199 (Senior Thesis) class after a successful thesis defense. They are joined by their adviser Prof. Ma. Theresa Payongayong, PhD (3rd from the left), Instr. John Alonzo (4th from the left), and Asst. Prof. Henry Fernando (6th from the left).
About the Author
Junno Alfonsus M. Salvanera is a graduating BA Philosophy major who has attained magna cum laude honors. He will be an incoming freshman at the UP College of Law for AY 2025-2026. He also served the department as Project Head for the UPD-Cambridge Lecture Series 2025.