This week, it seems like every law blogger is offering his or her own (although actually, it’s usually “his”, hmm) list of the ‘hierarchy of legal scholarship’ , , . I think there’s quite a lot to be said for Eric Muller’s Hierarchy of Legal Scholarship, but it’s just too darn complicated.
So here’s mine:
0 – Lousy articles which get the facts wrong
1 – Lousy articles
2- Good articles
3 – Articles which would have been really good except they go on too long
4- Really good articles (bonus for a snappy title)
5 – Supremely good articles (very rare)
Not only is this much simpler, but I expect it will command wide agreement.