Part of the problem lies in the overlapping among the fields of law, criminology, and the other social sciences. Furthermore, the study and practice of law has a dogmatic theoretical basis, while criminology, and empirical science, has variable hypotheses that change as the factual evidence changes. Traditionally, legal scholarship has viewed the social sciences as auxiliary and subordinate disciplines; criminology still is frequently taught in passing by law professors instead of criminological experts. The social sciences, represented by criminology, deserve an autonomous place in law curricula because they can serve as unique and valuable didactic purpose in the preparation of law professionals. Criminology could be the channel by which lawyers gain awareness of the interdependence between law and the sciences that are devoted to examining human behavior and the causes of deviance. Law curricula should include a social science/criminology component that teaches the basic tenets of behavioral science; examine offender case histories, self-reports, and justice system records; and exposes students to practice with direct offender contact. The program should provide group dynamics, interaction, and self-awareness experiences through team work in study projects and group task assignments. The most vital thing for prospective lawyers and judges to acquire early in their professional education is a sense of self from the psychological perspective, so that they can approach their work with offenders aware of their common humanity that differs only in degrees of culpability and deviance.