A Natural History of Legal Argument
This book explores how trial lawyers, driven by self-interest, use argumentation to shape legal and ethical ideals in society through their manipulation of language, people, and objects.
It argues that by employing various persuasive styles and deceptive strategies, lawyers influence juries and affect broader legal and communal values. These individual actions, while focused on client interests, collectively contribute to significant social changes in the practice and perception of law.
A Natural History of Legal Argument delves into the nuanced ways in which these legal practitioners craft their arguments to not only serve their clients but also to redefine the boundaries of legal discourse.
This book explores how trial lawyers, driven by self-interest, use argumentation to shape legal and ethical ideals in society through their manipulation of language, people, and objects.
It argues that by employing various persuasive styles and deceptive strategies, lawyers influence juries and affect broader legal and communal values. These individual actions, while focused on client interests, collectively contribute to significant social changes in the practice and perception of law.
A Natural History of Legal Argument delves into the nuanced ways in which these legal practitioners craft their arguments to not only serve their clients but also to redefine the boundaries of legal discourse.
Description
This book explores how trial lawyers, driven by self-interest, use argumentation to shape legal and ethical ideals in society through their manipulation of language, people, and objects.
It argues that by employing various persuasive styles and deceptive strategies, lawyers influence juries and affect broader legal and communal values. These individual actions, while focused on client interests, collectively contribute to significant social changes in the practice and perception of law.
A Natural History of Legal Argument delves into the nuanced ways in which these legal practitioners craft their arguments to not only serve their clients but also to redefine the boundaries of legal discourse.
