[rfw300]

Exactly this. The Platonic ideal of statutory interpretation is the “no vehicles in the park” statute. It’s simple enough on the surface but you can think of an infinite number of edge cases that demand nuance (e.g. Scooters? A war memorial featuring a tank? A wheelchair?).

Enumerating and handling these cases in a formal mathematical sense is at best futile and at worst leads to absurd outcomes. Law isn’t made formally because lawyers don’t know how, it’s because intelligently applied common sense is an essential part of a sane legal system. [0]

[0] For what it’s worth, it’s not as if the formalism vs. common sense debate is actually settled in the legal sphere. See, e.g., the debate about textualism vs. legislative intent in American statutory interpretation. Even the textualist position lies much, much further along the spectrum than formal specification though, and it has its own problems.