Both professions require writing detailed, overly specific, reasonably watertight arguments that will be read by only a handful of people, so that tracks

Arguments so watertight that none of them ever agree with each other and have argued for thousands of years without a resolution to even the most basic of questions.

The appearance of a logical argument is easier to achieve and often good enough for their purposes (publishing papers, winning lawsuits).

Connections are far more important IMO. The opinion itself is there for the plebs so they don't revolt when the high-IQ trickery flagrantly mismatches the plain language of the constitution. The courts are really the main thing nowadays that can provide legitimacy to the acts of the state since it doesn't follow the people or the documents authorizing it.

Using a vocabulary that is known only to themselves.

> Using a vocabulary that is known only to themselves.

So? Almost all professions have jargon known only to themselves. You think most people have any clue what a garbage collector is?

Law and medicine seems to go overboard with e.g. latin terms for everything.

A monad is just a monoid in the category of endofunctors, after all.

But a law degree is probably even better. I know what you mean though, consulting companies also hire the (top 1-3%) philosophy majors and math/physics majors for the same reason. Good thought processes.

Philosophy undergrad here and yeah I’d say law school was the typical next step. A few medical school as well.