The external legal culture is an even more powerful curb, in fact, if not in theory. The concept of legal culture assumes that judges never "invent" doctrine; that in any given period, the general legal culture sets limits, defines boundaries, and establishes a range of opinions no less than does the internal legal culture (the legal tradition). It is out of the question for a Supreme Court Justice today, no matter how "conservative," to be as retrograde on racial issues as the most "liberal" judge of the 1880s. The whole spectrum of opinion has shifted in the direction of racial equality, and the corresponding interpretation of the meaning of equal protection has shifted accordingly. The social context is the source of the norms that mold general opinion on matters of race. The norms change over time as context changes. The Justices today live in a world of computers, gene-splicing, and communication satellites, and their views are profoundly affected by the world all about them. They also live in a society dedicated more deeply to individual rights and to race and gender equality than the world of their predecessors. The study of legal culture is a study of this world, and those who stress this factor believe it is one of the best ways to understand where the Court has been, where it is, and where it is going.