Section 2. (b) The Method of Natural Science.
If now we ask how we are to plan our work, what method we are to follow, we must agree that to establish scientifically the principles of our discipline alone is not sufficient. If we are to make progress, the daily routine also must be scientifically administered. Every sentence, every investigation, every official act must satisfy the same demand as that made of the entire juristic science. In this way only
 Cf. H. Gross's Archiv VI, 328 and VIII, 84.
can we rise above the mere workaday world of manual labor, with its sense-dulling disgust, its vexatious monotony, and its frightful menace against law and justice. While jurists merely studied the language of dead laws, expounding them with effort unceasing, and, one may complain, propounding more, we must have despaired of ever being scientific. And this because law as a science painfully sought justification in deduction from long obsolete norms and in the explanation of texts. To jurisprudence was left only the empty shell, and a man like Ihering spoke of a ``circus for dialectico- acrobatic tricks.''
Yet the scientific quality is right to hand. We need only to take hold of the method, that for nearly a century has shown itself to us the most helpful. Since Warnk
Every fundamental investigation must first of all establish the
 R. v. Ihering: Scherz und Ernst in der Jurisprudenz. Leipzig 1885.
 Warnkonig. Versuch einer Begr