Thus, when a court provides a reason for a decision, it gives a justification necessarily broader than that decision, and accordingly it announces what is in effect a rule (or a principle, standard, norm, or maxim) more general than the decision itself. To provide a reason in a particular case is to transcend the very particularity of that case. And indeed, the same structure operates when a court seeks to justify a rule or principle itself. Just as providing a reason for an outcome ordinarily takes the outcome to a greater level of generality, so too does providing a reason for a reason-or a reason for a rule or a reason for a principle.

Unknown, Frederick Schauer - Thinkin…, loc. 324