Abstract

Andrew Morrison Stumpff’s paper, “The Law is a Fractal: The Attempt to Anticipate Everything” is very intelligible and seemingly rather simple, which he manages to achieve with excellent analogies and examples. The author has managed to evoke some relevant and important questions which are worth pondering. He argues that the act of anticipating every single outcome, by the rule writes, creates complexity in law. This argument provokes the question of whether simplicity in law is what the rule writers should aim for? This response paper will attempt to reflect on his article by elaborating on the points that the author has put forth, points which we are in agreement with, points of disagreement, and our critique.

Keywords