The Human Element: A Forgotten Intellect
In his book A Miscellany of Men, G.K. Chesterton introduces us to a modern intellectual — a fictional character who speaks disdainfully of the creature called “man,” pointing out that he lacks fur or feathers. The character declares,
“I doubt whether such an animal is worth preserving. He must, ultimately, perish in the cosmic struggle when pitted against well-armoured and well-insulated species with feathers, trunks, crests, scales, horns and shaggy hair. If man cannot live without these luxuries, you must scrap man.”
Ironically, this modern intellectual overlooks the most defining human trait — natural intelligence. As history proves, humanity survived the cosmic battle without any fur on its back, but certainly with a feather in its cap.
From Fire to AI: Humanity’s Technological Evolution
In The Coming Wave, Mustafa Suleyman, co-founder of DeepMind, outlines transformative moments in human civilization — from the discovery of fire and the invention of the wheel to the electrification of life. He suggests that Homo sapiens is better understood today as Homo technologicus.
Around 9000 BCE, the Agricultural Revolution marked a shift from nomadic lifestyles to settled societies. The next great leap occurred in the 1700s, with the Industrial Revolution driven by steam, leading to factories, telegraphs, and locomotives. This revolution also created a new problem — information overload.
The solution? The use of technology to manage and control this information, thus giving birth to the Information Revolution, captured powerfully in James R. Beniger’s The Control Revolution. Early stages saw the spread of the telegraph and telephone; later came the internet, bringing portals that could collect and organise terabytes of data.
As user data exploded, systems were needed to analyse and interpret that data intelligently — thus emerged Artificial Intelligence (AI). You can explore more on the evolution of legal technology in our Insight section.
The Rise of AI: From Tools to Thinkers
AI marked a shift from mere automation to cognitive computation. While traditional computing aimed to reduce human discretion, AI aims to eliminate it altogether, transforming hours of work into outcomes within seconds.
Driven by brute processing power, smart algorithms, and massive data sets, AI excels at pattern recognition and decision-making. Two key models empower AI: supervised learning (based on human behaviour) and reinforcement learning (self-taught using ongoing data enhancements).
The potential of AI became undeniable in the gaming world. The ancient East Asian game Go was revolutionised when AlphaGo — initially trained on 150,000 games — surpassed even the world champions. It didn’t just replicate human moves; it created new strategies, taking the game beyond the bounds of human imagination.
Today, similar advancements are being observed across every human domain, including the law. For latest developments in law and tech, check our News section.
Legal Research and the Burden of Precedents
Legal research traditionally rests heavily on precedents. In India, official law reports date back to the Indian Law Reports Act of 1875, authorising High Courts to publish decided cases. After Independence, private reporting flourished due to criticism of official reports for being expensive and slow.
With the digital revolution, court judgments are now published online — eliminating the need for printed, bound volumes. Today, instant access to judgments, summaries, and headnotes through portals and even social media is the norm. However, this has led to a new problem: overload.
The availability of countless reported and unreported cases online has blurred distinctions. In a recent decision — NBCC (India) Ltd. vs. State of West Bengal, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 46 — the Supreme Court noted the critical distinction between decision-making and precedent-setting. Not every judgment, the Court emphasized, constitutes binding precedent under Article 141 of the Constitution. You can read more such decisions on LiveLaw.
The Digital Deluge: A Double-Edged Sword
The explosion of case law now mirrors the earlier problem of data excess that gave rise to the information revolution. Peter Clinch’s 1992 guide Using a Law Library still resonates today. He quoted Samuel Johnson:
“Knowledge is of two kinds. We know a subject ourselves, or we know where we can find information on it.”
Back then, Appendix 6 introduced Lexis — an early online legal database. Even then, users were warned:
“Information can only be retrieved in response to requests structured in a way the computer understands.”
Today’s AI research tools do understand legal keywords and can scan entire databases for relevant judgments, but the logic remains: Quality of input determines the quality of output. Legal professionals must ask well-formed, precise questions to receive actionable answers. Check out our Legal Helpline section for practical support on such issues.
AI and the Future of Legal Research
There’s no doubt AI is revolutionising legal research. Lawyers now routinely use AI to frame arguments, identify precedents, and structure pleadings. Yet, the foundation remains the same — strong legal understanding and critical reading.
AI is built on human knowledge, which has been accumulated and codified over centuries. It can absorb and reproduce knowledge, and even make smart predictions. But without human clarity in posing questions, it risks becoming a black box of confusion.
The legal field is growing rapidly — new statutes, rulings, petitions. Legal researchers must use all available tools, from dusty volumes to cloud-based AI. But relying exclusively on one, especially AI, is risky.
Legal imagination, articulation, and strategy come from constant engagement with law, both on paper and online. Research is a multidimensional effort. AI tools are useful, but so are thoughtful commentaries and manual exploration of law books. For a broader view, visit our Most Popular reads.
Conclusion: Read. Reflect. Then Research.
To truly leverage AI in legal research, we must revive our reading habits. AI tools are only as good as the queries we feed them. The principle of GIGO — Garbage In, Garbage Out — applies as much to law as it does to coding.
A legal researcher’s best weapon is not AI, but the wisdom to use AI wisely.
🔗 For more visual insights, visit The Legal Observer’s YouTube Channel.
