Skip to main content

Chapter 12


Chapter 12’s focus on argumentation as it is used in the legal sphere was especially interesting to me because I intend on going to law school and becoming a lawyer, and have taken law classes that cover many of the same concepts that are outlined in this chapter. What is especially interesting to me is the idea that argumentation in the legal sphere isn’t necessarily used to make decisions that are the most fair, but rather the decisions that will cause the least chaos. Courts in the United States follow the mantra of stare decisis, which is a latin phrase that means “let the decision stand”. Because there are little to no statutes in civil law, courts have to make decisions based on what they think to be the best decision due to the facts and circumstances. In order to speed up the process and avoid bogging down the court system with debates over issues that have been addressed before, courts follow stare decisis by making decisions in line with decisions made in previous similar cases. Because of this, when addressing a new issue, courts strive to make decisions that aren’t necessarily the most fair, but that will cause the least chaos and difficulty to analyze, since they will be setting the precedent to future cases. That is why arguments used in the legal sphere shouldn’t seek to make your case seem right based on what is fair or morally right, but to convince the appropriate decision makers that your argument is the most logical according to the facts and circumstances.

Comments

  1. I really like how you brought up the fact that legal decisions aren't necessarily the right decision, but rather the decision that makes the most sense. There are two opposing sides that have once chance at delivering the best argument that is factual and will benefit their client. As you said, there is only one chance to get it right, so everything is on the line. Even the side who is in the right wins, it is important that they compose and offer an accurate and respectable argument that is free of fallacies. I think having an honest argument in all senses of the word is so important for reputation and public opinion down the line.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I like the that you mention that the court system in place tries to go with what they think will cause the least amount of chaos and that doesn't always mean that it is morally right. The decision makers in the court case have a lot of power to influence the future rulings as well and if the decision makers come to a conclusion, but if the decision makers don't choose the best option it has a major impact. It's important to have attorney's represent someone because they are specialists with, legal things, but also well versed in how to deal with logical fallacies so that the opposition can not take advantage of the other party, thereby holding each side accountable for the most fair and logical argument.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Chap 5

Chapter five focuses primarily on identifying and developing propositions for problems that people think are relevant. It goes over 6 steps for choosing a valid proposition based on a perceived “feeling of doubt.” While all six steps may not be necessary, the collectively ensure a well thought out and firm proposition. The six steps include identifying the question, surveying implicated objectives (or understanding what is the goal accomplishment in regard to the question), searching for new information, considering alternative options, considering costs and risks of each potential proposition, and then finally choosing one of the propositions. The authors then go on to talk about analyzing and strengthening the proposition chosen. This includes identification and ranking of the issues that the proposition addresses as well as understanding how the decision makers will react to these issues and propositions. In general, with all these methods of critically analyzing the proposition, ...

Chaper 8

Chapter 8 of Argumentation and Critical Decision Making continues down the route of talking about support for argumentation. This chapter specifically focuses on values as support for arguments, how to recognize them and the best ways to attack them. Values are defined as “ concepts of what is desirable that arguers use and decision makers understand” (121).  There are several types of values mentioned such as stated, implied, positive, negative, terminal, instrumental, abstract and concrete values.  Stated values are state directly what concepts they hold. For example, words such as “freedom” or “health” are stated values because they mean exactly what they're trying to portray. Not all values are as explicit. Some are more vague and called implied values. One of the examples that the book uses to show the contrast between the two is in the case of work equality. When talking about the subject saying, “ Equal pay for equal work” would be a stated value and “ Women deserve th...

Case Building

Chapter 6 of Argumentation and Critical Decision Making focuses on the steps required in building a case. Among the concepts that are discussed, visualization stands out as one of the most important. On page 101, the authors even state “Powerful arguments are only half of the job in preparing a case or presentation. The other half is developing a convincing vision through which you can tell the story of your ultimate purpose” In other words, having a great argument alone is not going to necessarily gain you adherence. Instead, it needs to be supplemented with a story that vividly shows the decision maker the outcome if they were to agree to the proposition.   The chapter goes on to say that to create a powerful vision you must know the decision maker’s narrative of the subject you are arguing about. The example that is given is college. Some decision makers might have had the greatest time of their lives in college during which they made a ton of friends and found love. On the ...