plenary: “always on my mind” – old school rhetoric and new ...plenary: “always on my mind”...

Plenary: “Always on My Mind” – Old School Rhetoric and New School

Cognitive Science

Presented By:

Lucy Jewel University of Tennessee College of Law

Knoxville, TN

Presented at: ACLEA 53rd Mid-Year Meeting January 28th – January 31st, 2017

Nashville, Tennessee

Lucy Jewel UniversityofTennesseeCollegeofLaw

Knoxville,TN

Professor  Jewel  is an Associate Professor at  the University of Tennessee College of Law She has been teaching  law  related courses  for over  ten years. Prior  to  teaching at  the University of Tennessee, she taught  at  Atlanta’s  John Marshall  Law  School, where  she  also  served  as Director  of  Legal  Skills  and Professionalism.  Professor  Jewel’s  teaching  is  informed  by  several  years  of  practice  as  a  commercial litigator with the New York City firm of Wachtel, Masyr, & Missry, LLP. 

Professor  Jewel  frequently  presents  on  legal writing,  legal  education,  and  professionalism  topics  at national and  international academic  conferences. Most  recently,  she has  spoken at  the  Legal Writing Institute’s Biennial Conference, The International Conference on Legal Education, Hosted by Bahcesehir Universitesi  and  the  Turkish  Bar  Association  in  Ankara,  Turkey,  and  The  International  Legal  Ethics Conference at City University College of Law, London, UK. 

Professor  Jewel’s  scholarship  is  interdisciplinary  in  nature  and  focuses  on  the  intersections  between technology,  law, culture, and  rhetoric. She writes about cognitive approaches  to  legal argumentation, technology and the practice of law, the impact of culture on the legal profession, and the past, present, and future of legal education. Her articles have appeared in journals such as the Yale Journal of Law & Technology, University of Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal, Buffalo Law Review, and the Minnesota Journal of Law, Science, and Technology. 

1/13/17

1

Old School Rhetoric & New School Cognitive Science

LucyJewel,Assoc.Prof.UniversityofTennesseeCollegeofLawACLEAmid-yearmeeting,NashvilleJanuary30,2017

Roadmap

• Ancientrhetoricprinciplesendure.• Moderncognitivesciencehelpsexplainwhy.• Howcantheseprinciplesaddresshowweteachattorneys?

OldSchoolRhetoric/ClassicalRhetoric

1/13/17

2

ClassicalRhetoric– theFormoftheArgumentCorax,Syracuse,466B.C.

Argumentsshouldcontain:• Proem(introduction)• Narration(statementoffacts)• Argument(principalandresponsetocounterarguments)

• Peroration(conclusion)

ClassicalRhetoric:TheFormoftheArgument CiceroDuringtheRomanempire,theacceptedformofapersuasivespeechbecame:

• Introduction(proem)• StatementofFacts(narration)• DefinitionofIssues(status)• OutlineoftheArguments• Argument• Counter-Argument• Conclusion(telos)

ModernLegalPractice:ThePartsofaLegalBrief

• IssuesPresented• Introduction• StatementofFacts• SummaryoftheArgument• Argument• Conclusion

1/13/17

3

ClassicalRhetoric:TheSyllogism(Logos)Aristotle’sView

A=B– Allmenaremortal.C=A– Socratesisaman.C=B– Socratesismortal.

ClassicalRhetoric:TheSyllogism(Logos)Transitivity,Containers,Categories

A=B– Allmenaremortal.C=A– Socratesisaman.C=B– Socratesismortal.

ClassicalRhetoric&ModernLegalWritingTheIRAC Structure

IssueRuleApplicationoftheruletothefactsConclusion

1/13/17

4

ClassicalRhetoric&ModernLegalWritingTheIRAC StructureofLegalAnalysis

TheFoundation:TheLegalSyllogism• Allcontractsconveyingpropertyworthover$500mustbeinwritinginordertobeenforceable.• Stuart’scontracttosellhisPorschefor$12,000wasnotinwriting.• Stuart’scontracttosellhisPorschecannotbeenforced.

ClassicalRhetoric&ModernLegalWritingTheIRAC Structure

TheSyllogismthenbecomesIRAC:• Issue – isStuart’scontracttosellhisPorscheenforceable?• Rule – Allcontractsconveyingpropertyworthover$500mustbeinwritinginordertobeenforceable.• Application – Stuart’scontracttosellhisPorschefor$12,000wasnotinwriting.• Conclusion – Stuart’scontracttosellhisPorschecannotbeenforced.

ClassicalRhetoric:CategoriesAristotle’sViewofEssences

1/13/17

5

ClassicalLegalThought:DichotomousCategories

Logos&LegalReasoning:ClassicalLegalThoughtLegitimizesArguments

LogosandLegalReasoning,MoldingtheRulesinaRealCase:WhatisaSandwich?IsaBurritoaSandwich?

1/13/17

6

Asandwichisanitemoffoodcontainingfilling(meat,vegetables,etc.)inbetweentwoslicesofbread.

- OR -

Asandwichisanitemoffoodwithfilling(meat,vegetables,etc.),servedwithinorontopofagrain-basedproduct.

LogosandLegalReasoning,MoldingtheRulesinaRealCase:WhatisaSandwich?IsaBurritoaSandwich?

CriticismsofOldSchoolRhetoric

OldSchoolRhetoricCanProduceHarmfulOutcomes

1/13/17

7

SoWhyUseOldSchoolRhetoric?Thehumanbraincravesorder andstructure.

WhyUseOldSchoolRhetoric?NewSchoolCognitiveScience

Thesyllogism(basedoncleancategories)islikealegalphonenumber,awayofchunking informationinawaythatlightensthereader’scognitiveload.

WhyUseOldSchoolRhetoric?NewSchoolCognitiveScience

TheFluencyPrinciple:• Studiesshowthatpeopleunderstandinformationmoreeasilywhenitispresentedclearlyandcoherently.

• Peopleratefluentauthorsasmoreintelligent.

1/13/17

8

OldSchoolRhetoric,UsedThoughtfully,ProducesGoodLegalArguments

Whatdoesthismeanforeducatinglawyers?Threetakeaways:1. Excellentlawyeringnecessarilyinvolvescategorymanipulation,but

excellentlawyersdon’talwaysknowthattheyareactuallydoingthis.Lessonsthatmakethisprocessexplicitareveryhelpful.

2. Unpackingcategoriesisavitalskillforanyattorneyonthedefensiveside.

3. Thedark-sideofarigidcategoricalmindsetinlaw:• all-or-nothingthinking• Winvs.Lose• =Anxiety,Stress,Unhappiness