  It was one of Rehberg's central themes that the gap between theory and practice, between general principle and specific constitution, has to be bridged by judgment.  Judgment is the special faculty and province of the statesman.  Its task is to determine how best to apply the principles of reason under specific circumstances.  It should never be confused simply with reason, the intellectual power of determining general rules; for, as Kant taught in the first  Kritik,[39]  judgment is that faculty that determines the application of rules and therefore does not stand under any rule itself.  Judgment, however, is no easy task: there are many ways of applying the same principles; and the consequences of applying them have to be weighed against one another.  Judgment is a faculty that improves with age and experience, and that sometimes requires technical expertise. The shortcoming of the French radicals is that they had underestimated judgment as they had overestimated reason. They assumed that each principle involves the criterion for its application, and that it should be applied in just one unique way, regardless of the circumstances.  