In this Article we review the several positions that over the years emerged about the goals of comparative law as an autonomous discipline. Asking the question of aims is a matter of identity not only for comparatists, but for jurists in general. We claim that if lawyers want to regain a role in society, in building the new social order, they should not indulge into the dry pulp of dogmatic; they should rather adopt methodologies that help them to concur in the processes of legal change and become uniquely positioned in defining not what the law is, but what the law should be.