Everyday and as a matter of course, legal professionals work with the purposes of a norm. At the same time, the purpose in law has persistently puzzled legal theory and legal dogmatics since Jhering. For instance, orientation towards purpose is seen as a cipher for methodological syncretism, and practicality is contrasted with legality. Against this backdrop, Thomas Wischmeyer subjects the complex and multifaceted relationship of law to the concept of purpose to a comprehensive genealogical reconstruction and a critical theoretical analysis. It becomes evident that purposes, as a topic in the constitutional state, can only be articulated in the plural. Above all, this reveals the actual practical problem of discussing purposes in law: Who is it that sets legally relevant purposes? Does the democratic idea of law-making as purpose-setting rest on an intentional fallacy?.