1

1/15/2016 1

How to Reason Visual Aids

Professor Crump, 2012

3 Logical Constructionsdeductive logic

(syllogism)

three premises

All-All-All, etc.

middle term

inductive logic

analogy

(metaphor)

induction

(generalization)1/15/2016 2

Fallacy (Next Chapter)

previewing fallacy

“all dogs have four legs; all cats have four legs;

∴ all dogs are cats.”

“illegal searches get suppressed; this search was illegal; ∴ this search gets suppressed.”

“this team has lost 8 out of last 10 games; ∴ loser.”

Bertrand Russell’s chicken

1/15/2016 3

Examples & Problems1.a. All ABX’s = farfles;

All farfles = Z3's;

∴ all ABX’s = Z3's.

b. No Wookies = feathers;

Chewbacca = Wookie;

∴ Chewbacca ≠ feathers.

c. All 3d Thurs = meeting;

today = 3d Thurs;

∴ today = meeting.

d. All past Thurs, market

up; today Thurs;

∴ market up. (NO)

e. Cogito ergo sum. (NO)

1/15/2016 4

Problems (continued)2. Legal syllogisms: look to the structure

3. Fixing cogito argument? “All reasoning things exist; I reason; ∴ I exist.” Valid?

4. Law school examinations: Why “This, therefore that” or “This, because that”doesn’t work

5. Fixing cogito w/induction?

6. “You can observe a lot by watching:” syllogism? analogy? induction?

none of the above?

7. “I’m going to lose because this court always has invalidated affirmative action plans.” Induction; is it reliable?

8. mixing inductive & deductive: fingerprint uniqueness: inductive; used deductively

9. language problems

10. chain syllogisms

1/15/2016 5

4 Types of Premisespremise forms

A (Affirmo)

“All __ are __”

E (nEgo)

“No __ are __”

I (affIrmo)

“Some __ are __”

O (negO)

“Some __ are not __”

1/15/2016 6

2

bArbArA (AAA)

All dogs are mammals;

all mammals are animals;

∴ all dogs are animals

bArbArI

All dogs are mammals;

all mammals are animals;

∴ some dogs are animals

bArbArE (FALSE)

All dogs are mammals;

all mammals are animals;

∴ no dogs are animals1/15/2016 7

1. and means

2. Barbara: all a are m,

all m are b

a b

m

3. the fEstInO syllogism:

no birds are fish (E)

some fish are edible (I)

some edibles are not birds (O)1/15/2016 8

IRAC

[Issue]

Rule [major premise]

Analysis (facts) [minor]

Conclusion

MPC defines murder as . . .

Evidence here shows . . .

Conclusion: murder

Note limits

Analogy

Induction1/15/2016 9

Propositional (Symbolic) Logic“SG is Russian” (p)

“SG is a thief” (q)

“SG is fit” (r)

“If SG is either Russian or a thief, unfit” =

“If p or q, then not r” = (p∨q)⊃∼r.

Since this is false:

∼[(p∨q)⊃∼r]

(“It is not true that ‘either Russian or thief’ implies SG is unfit”)

1/15/2016 10

∼ not

⋅ and

∨ or

⊃ implies

≡ is equiv to

∼p (not p)

p⋅q (p and q)

p∨q (p or q)

p⊃q (if p, ∴ q)

p≡q (equiv truth value)1/15/2016 11

Problems1. baseball, strike,

p∨(q⋅∼t)∨(r⋅t)∨s∨u≡x

(may be better:

p∨(q⋅∼t)∨(r⋅t)∨s∨u⊃x

2. “If discrim & not

least discrim, or if

nondiscrimin &

burden clearly greater

than gain, unconst.”:

[D⋅∼l)∨(∼D⋅[b>g])]⊃U1/15/2016 12

3

Figure 13: A Propositional Calculus ("PC")

1/15/2016 13

Problems1.(p≡q)⋅[(p⋅q)∨(p⋅r)]

(p≡q)⋅[p⋅(q∨r)] distributive

(p≡q)⋅[p⋅(p∨r)] substitution

(p≡q)⋅p⋅∼r excluded midl

or:

(p≡q)⋅[(p⋅p)∨(p⋅r)] subst

(p≡q)⋅[p∨(p⋅r)] identity

(p≡q)⋅p⋅∼r excluded midl

2. [(D⋅∼l)∨(∼D⋅b>g)]⊃U

3. substitute ∼l for (D⋅∼l):

[∼l ∨(∼D⋅b>g)]⊃U

4. Why? (1) precision.

(2) shorter.

(3) transformation.

1/15/2016 14

1/15/2016 15

structuralfallacy/circularity

fallacy/def’n

fallacy/issue transfmtn

fallacy/authority

fallacy/middle term

fallacy/conflation

fallacy/confl entire premise

1/15/2016 16

semiotics and metaphysicssemiotics = symbols

metaphysics = concept/

true nature of things

1. rookie ofcr: “perp = red shirt; this ≠ red; ˆ not perp”

2. word = “skin of a living thought”

3. “Yes, Virginia”: Christmas symbolism = real; Santa = Christmas symbolism; ˆ Santa = real

4. Importance to logic

1/15/2016 17

linguistic/conceptual(semiotics/ metaphysics)

fallacy/substituted meaning

fallacy/ambivalent middle

fallacy/metaphor

analogy

1/15/2016 18

examples/problems1. circular; def’n: death penalty

“barbarous” or “justice”2. issue transfmtn: “he gave false testimony; ˆ perjurer”3. no middle term:

“mayor → law & order; Hitler → law & order; ˆ mayor = Hitler.”4. conflation: the cogito argumt5. ambivalent middle:

APA → peds “normal”“normal” = acceptableˆ APA → peds acceptbl

6. metaphor/analogytorture = unconstmental depr similarˆ mental depr unconst

4

1/15/2016 19

inductive: structuralfallacy/post hoc = propterfallacy/consistencyfallacy/inadequate sample

too smallunrepresentative

inductive: biasfallacy/availabilityfallacy/anchoringfallacy/configuration

fallacy/clumps/random

1/15/2016 20

examples/problems1 smoking “cause” cancer?

perhaps--“yes”(but what is “cause”?)

2 consistency/samplingdist closer to power line,high cancer rate

3 overcoming anchoringdism of power line suits

4 availabilityblack: racism = procedureproducing disparate resultwhite: racism = intent

5 configuration/completionF-16 pilot fires on fleeing civilians

6 random clumpsnewspaper stories & gun violence

1/15/2016 21

testing inductionsummative vs. ampliativeenumerative v. variative

“calendar: no Jan. 1"“water boils 100°”

abduction & retroductionof mechanism: creation & rejectn of H1, H2etc. about “why”

1/15/2016 22

examples/problems1 state ct, case 1st impression

8 Virginia decis8 other states

2 voluminous hosp data= nonpaternal male child abuseenum. v. variatv

3 abductn/retroductnre nonpaternal abuseH1: maternal prefrncH2: male jealousyH3? H4? H5?

4 Pierce’s optimism, abductn, justified?

Abduction/Retroduction?Morgellon’s Disease:

Painful lesions, skin-crawling feeling, perception of colorful fibers sticking through skin

Related to what?

1/15/2016 23 1/15/2016 24

holisticdialectical

thesis v. antithesis, synthesisstory theory

the “smell test”1 sci theories,

trials as dialectic2 U.S. S. Ct:

“a syllogism is not a story”; ˆ pros can use prej/probative ev & refuse stipulatn

5

1/15/2016 25

epistemology/metaphysicsskepticism, empiricism, rationalism,

coherence

1 syllogisms proved by:

(a) reason, (b) observation,

(c) consistency, (d) nothing?

1/15/2016 26

2 St. Anselm’s ontological proof: God = nothing greater imaginable; greatest must exist since if not, greater; ˆ God exists

3 Thomistic proof: all motion has cause; ˆPrime Mover

4 skeptics’ response

1/15/2016 27

Limits of Logicnonsense, jokes; whimsical choices (discipline)1 appeal of magicians?2 penguins: “look! orange juice!”3 appeal of humor?4 car salesman: picture yourself . . . .faith & reason1 Darwin/Genesis2 Pascal’s bet:God = 0 to 1 prob;heaven = ∞; ˆ expectancy = ∞3 evil in name/faith

a. inevitable?b. use reason/prevent?

1/15/2016 28

economics: the marketthe allocative effect of the market:supply and demandcomparison to central planningthe invisible handequilibrium

Internet Proposal:

Let’s all boycott

ONE

gas station company—

to force prices down!

1/15/2016 29 1/15/2016 30

signaling effect of prices:demand or supply curve shifts; equil price

changes; and equil quantity follows

price controls: shortages

6

Price Controls=“no shale gas revolution in China,” in spite of ambitious goals.

1/15/2016 31

“Price caps on Prescription Drugs Is Bad Medicine”

Op Ed: Chron 1/21/00

1/15/2016 32

Also:

What if government sets a price FLOOR (or requires a useless expense)?

(It works the other way too.)

1/15/2016 33 1/15/2016 34

consumer sovereigntyone & ½ cheers?

1 school vouchers support? oppositn?

2 taxicab fare

reg or competition?

3 the efficiency of enforcing contracts

1/15/2016 35

marginal cost, productivity, & revenuemarginal cost:

1 more unitm cost curve--factors/productionmarginal productiv:

tends to equal marginal costmarginal revenue:

tends to equal marginal costefficient mix/factors

1/15/2016 36

problems1 how much spend to renovate a law firm

property?

2 how decide what renovation ideas to spend it on?

7

1/15/2016 37

efficiencies (benefits)productn efficiencymix of factors/prodinnovationproduction volumeinvestment (prsnt/fut)

distribution efficiencymarginal utilityPareto-optimality

no trade improvessatisfactionnot “equal”

Kaldor-H efficiencytot gains/winners exceed tot lossesPareto-superiorif compensate

1/15/2016 38

1/15/2016 39

problems1 Pareto-optimality

from market:Why?

2 factory’s 100-lbeffluent; citizensprefer 50; $100,000cost, $500,000benefit: K-Hefficiency for $100,000 cost to be imposed(should citizens pay it?)

1/15/2016 40

efficiency and equalityefficiency v. equality

mkt = efficiency,not distrib equalitytolerable?gross inequality?

wealth distribinconsis/efficiency

1 H Chavez’s Venezuela2 scarce necess3 in-kind or unrestricted?4 price controls/tax & transfer?5 erad poverty/reduce billionrs?

1/15/2016 41

macroeconomics

growth, employmt, stabilityinterrelated/inconsis?1 GDP, CPI, unemp2 unemp-inflation–

double digit; Fed cutmoney supplyinflation → 6.2%unemp: 6 → 10+%

1/15/2016 42

Macroeconomics

Keynsian macroeconomy

GDP = Ye

= C + I + G + F

Fig 5, p. 70

investment “reverberates”

the multiplier, k

8

1/15/2016 43

the Fedrediscount rateopen mkt trans

(f funds rate)reserve reqmt

1 departures/Keynsiansupply sidecontrary

3 all Keynsians?4 why do open mkt trans work?5 “new” economy?

low unemp, & low inflatnwhat/Fed do?

1/15/2016 44

market imperfections: structuralmonopoly

evil? rational?restrict output, same motives

oligopolyfew enuf/indivstrategic behaviorprod different’nbarriers/entry

responsesregulationantitrust

1/15/2016 45

problems1 Rockets want SMALLER arena?

2 historical cost: signaling f’n?

3 lag, politics, undercap, noninnovatn→

brownouts; why?

4 prudent cost reg v. used & useful:

higher return

5 conscious parallel in prices → antitrust violatn?

6 antitrust & politics

Monopoly Restricts Supply“As the Economy Improves, Air Fares No Longer a Bargain”

Op-Ed, Chron. 9/5/10

1/15/2016 46

1/15/2016 47

distressed firms & overcompetition

distressed firmsovercompetition1 2nd largest acq

5th largest (distressed)2 let’s start a band! $$![OR: entertainmt law

firm!]3 lender, bus plan, market analysis:

competition

1/15/2016 48

public goodspublic goodshybrid goodsfree riderstragedy/commons1 school privitzn

advocates → vouchers2 trade secret law: efficient?3 Fiss, Against Settlement, bc doesn’t contrib to

precedent bank. Efficient?

9

1/15/2016 49

socioeconomicshomo economicusThaler’s experimentmax price/beerbrought from[exp resort][cheap grocer]1 2 employees,

same m u/money, same opp/embezzl,one does, one no can econ predict?

2 what factors make non-embezzlr?1/15/2016 50

externalitiesexternalities

pollutionaccidents[positive ext]

responsesignorepvt negotiatnprohib activityperform stdscost-internlzn:taxes, permits, subsidies, dmgs

Problems:1. Internalizatn

Better than Standards?2. Level of Deterrence/Expense: Last safety exp. of $1 = exactly $ 1 in safety

1/15/2016 51

problems1 negl std for person

w/disability efficient?2 vagueness/negl std:

inefficient3 Easterbrook:

airline safetyincrease → increased autosless safety

1/15/2016 52

damages & externalitiesaccident claims, efficiencycompens dmgs:

deterrence?compensatn?

punitive dmgs?gap-fillers?overkill?

1 Stachura case:compens & pun & “additional,” illegal

2 Smith v. Wadefn of punitives; gross neg? intent?

1/15/2016 53

unknown factorsincommensurability

shadow marketsirrationality/enforcemtuncertainty/future1 eminent dom, value/strip2 em dom, hist costtransaction costs1 litig trans costs, no-fault?2 higher ins deduct?3 class actn efficiency?

1/15/2016 54

Coase TheoremCoase Theoremrailroad → sparks;

2 poss rules:railroad liable/farmers absorb

if trans costs = 0,immaterial/efficiencywhich rule; partieswill negot eff

argumt for pvt bargwealth effects remainis Coase meaningless?

10

Economic Policy: A Summary of This CoverageI. The Market System and Its Efficiencies

A. The Allocative Effect of the Market

1. Supply & Demand; the Invisible Hand

2. Contrasting Central Control

3. Equilibrium Price & Quantity: No Waste

B. The Signaling Effect of Prices

1. Supply or Demand Curve Change

2. Effect of Price Controls: Shortage (or Waste)

C. Marginal Cost etc.

1. Efficient Use of Factors of Production

2. Marginal Cost, M. Productivity, M. Revenue1/15/2016 55

D. Production Efficiencies

Factor Use; Innovation; Quantity; Investment

E. Distributional Efficiencies

1. Pareto Optimality

2. Kaldor-Hicks Efficiency

F. The Coase Theorem: Efficiency of Pvt Barg

1/15/2016 56

1/15/2016 57

II. Imperfections Justifying Intervention in Markets

A. Equality as a Value (Traded vs. Efficiency)

B. Industry Structure

1. Monopoly, Oligopoly

2. Restriction of Supply

C. Overcompetition and Distressed Firms

D. Public Goods, Hybrids, Free Riders, Tragedy/Commons

E. Socioeconomics: The Failures of “Homo Economicus” 1/15/2016 58

F. Externalities

1. Types of Responses: Ignore; Regulate; Damages

2. Efficiency of Negligence Law: Cost Internalization

3. Actual & Exemplary Damages: Economic Functions

G. Incommensurability, Uncertainty, Irrationality

H. Transaction Costs

I. Information Asymmetries

[NOT “Bargaining Power” (but lawyers use it)]

1/15/2016 59

accounting: journal & ledgerjournal (chronolog)double entry

credit where $came from; debitwhere it went

ledger (categories)dbl entry facilitates

ledger, balance sheet, & income stmtASSETS = LIAB + EQUITYREVENUES = EXPNSES + NET INC

1/15/2016 60

balance sheet & income statement

balance sheet:

yr-end snapshot

income statement:

change over yr

11

1/15/2016 61

problems1. bal sheet: how related to journal?

2. income stmt: income; what return?

accrual or cash?

“accrue” earned but

not rec’d; “defer” rec’d but not earned

1/15/2016 62

1/15/2016 63

accrual accountingaccrual: reserves or allowances

conservatism: loss reas likely, reas estimateGAAP’sdepreciation

1. collect fees in advance: accrual, tax reasons2. accel. deprec:

double-decl balance

1/15/2016 64

judgment and manipulationjudgmt: standardsFASB, GAAP, etc.example: inventory; use

lower/cost or mktLIFO/FIFO/etc.

Footnotescooking books: characterizatn, inconsistency, valuatn,

reserves, depreciation, etc.

1/15/2016 65

“[Enron Officers] Acted in Good Faith”

Principles . . . require estimate . . . Not everything right”

Chron. May 4, 2006

1/15/2016 66

problems

1. lawsuit defendant’s books: (a) defer income, (b) characterize unearned, (c) high reserves, (d) inventory at mkt (pessimistic), (e) cash → sister corps, (f) LIFO, (g) ddb depreciatn

2. how read? (a) ftnotes?, (b) read fns, (c) consider impact, (d) rep of conformity to GAAP, (e) solvent acctnt, (f) audit

12

1/15/2016 67

controls and auditinginternal controls

separatn & duplicatn:custody, recording, authorizatn; receivingcash (2 people)record, paper trail:mech forcing cashaccounted, depositedcheck-paid items: separatn

auditing: verificatnaudit ltr: responsibility; descr of performance; opinion (GAAP; qualificatn)

1/15/2016 68

finance: methodsequity/net worthcapital acctsretained earningsdebt vs. equity1. finance thru retained earnings?2. LBO: equity, 20% of $40,000, or $8,000; borrow

$32,000 @ 8%: $5,750 net means yield of 40%. all equity, only 14%. “leverage.”

3. why not borrow 100%?

1/15/2016 69

time value of moneyTime value of $

why important?compound int

present value $1PV = 1/(1+i)n

PV = FV/(1+i)n

What interest, i?yield (rate/return)

i = (FV/PV)1/n - 11. present val, Sloan’s 5-yr recoveryPV = 1/(1+i)n (assume 10% rate)2. lottery, $50,000 in 20th yr:PV = 1/(1+i)n (assume 10% rate)3. total lottery PV for $1 million?PV = [1 - 1/(1+i)]n/i x (paymt)

= [1 - 1/(1.1)]20/0.1 x (paymt)= 8.5136 x (payment)

8.5136 x 50,000 = 425,6781/15/2016 70

problems cont’d4. yield/return, $1000 stock sold, $2000, 4 yr later?

i = (FV/PV)1/n - 1= (2000/1000)1/4 - 1= 21/4 - 1= 1.19 - 1 = 19%.

5. valuation/investmt:returns $10,000/yr for 15 yrs.

PV = paymt x [1 - 1/(1+i)n]/i= 10,000 [1 - 1/(1+0.08)15]/0.08= 10,000 x 8.56= 85,600

6. Family lawyers’ tactics: value assets your client will receive as low as possible (why)? (How accomplish?)

7. Commercial litigators, re damages: (a) Book value; (b) Liquidation value; (c) “Going concern” (income stream) value.

1/15/2016 71

risk premiumstatistical: std devX Bond, Y Bond:SD of Y is greater,= greater fluctuation

real vs. nominal1. inflation goes up, bond price goes down. Why?2. adjustable rate mortgage: Why cheaper than

fixed?3. fine-tuning risk sharing: yearly cap, overall cap

1/15/2016 72

management approachesclassical mgmt

rule-oriented systemsscientific mgmtadministrative mgmthuman relatns

modern mgmtquantitative theoryorganizatnl theorysystem theorycontingency theory

contemporary mgmtTotal Quality Mgmt (TQM)just-in-time mgmt

13

1/15/2016 73

decisionmakingdecisions

unstructured, uncertainpsych & political conflictgroup conformity

process: due diligence1. mkt share falls, 2 yr, new CEO.

conflict, politics, groupthink?decision called for?

2. why due diligence, & what?(a) new div mgr(b) auditor opinion for an IPO(c) med clinic, new bldg

1/15/2016 74

problems1. flaws:

(a) rule-oriented sys: no manual; emp’ees arrive late(b) scientific: 2 printers, no thought/consolidate(c) administrative: pres reprimands, praises floor workers(d) human relatns: higher wages for dirty factory(e) quantitative: no change in inventory, process for a decade(f) org theory: higher wages in dirty factory, but same system(g) systems theory: mail-order doesn’t understand product(h) contingency: mgr uses same techniques for internet bus as for

failing bank2. TQM & Just-in-Time:

(a) gen practice attorney(b) new rural hosp,(c) apt bldg for students

1/15/2016 75

a decision modeldiagnosis↓

options↓

investigate↓

decision↓

execution↓

review

feedback throughout

1/15/2016 76

decision aidsquantitative/visualformal/informalExplicit consideration of bias, fallacygroups: information, understanding, acceptance (conflict,

politics, norm effect, groupthink)1. decision steps:

(a) military reenlistmt(b) physicians, crowded(c) lawyer: defense case

2. crowded physicians:quant/visual, formal/ informal, bias/fallacy, groups/not

1/15/2016 77

marketing: the business plan

entrepreneur’s dream,

business plan

(a) goals, short/long

(b) market analysis

(c) internal assets

(d) pro forma stmts:

bal sheet, income, cash flow

1/15/2016 78

problems1. describe bus plan ingredients: (a) new GP lawyer

in Madisonville; (b) HDTV venture by electronics firm

2. market analysis for new Madisonville attyproduct strategies:

operational (price)quality (differentiatn)niche (segment focus, customer intimacy)Chevy, Mercedes, Porsche

compare ch. 2 (economics)

14

1/15/2016 79

marketing: three modelsoperational (stable mkt, finance,

structured op, labor/cost suprvisn)

(tech or soc change? competitors? cost pressure?)

(Ford loses to GM)

quality (differential too

great; cost competitors learn; changed preferences?)

segment focus

1/15/2016 80

market shares & strategiesmkt signals: price publicity, pre-announce, traditnl

leader, match or not, discountcooperative: devel new mkt; differentiateaggressive: advertising, terr. expansn, discount, new

entryretaliatn (reciprocal discount, terr. expansn,

advertising, regulators)discipline (fighting brands)commitment (resources, history, burning bridges)

1/15/2016 81

problems1. operational, quality, niche? (a) HDTV

standardized, cheap. (b) “fine furniture, abs dependbl.” (c) adapted to sports.

2. which at risk from (a) innovatn, (b) cost differential betw exp & cheap, (c) changed customer base, (d) unstable mkt share?

1/15/2016 82

problems cont’d3. one firm advertises aggressively.

competitor response? (signals, discpln, commitment, matching, territory, fighting brands)

4. prisoners’ game

5. public policy? retaliatn, etc. bad?

6. Compaq v. Dell, mkt share, both growing. decisions? strategies? competitive analysis?

1/15/2016 83

ethics & politics: history1 Greeks → Burke

& Rousseau?Duty!

2 Who shd own TV station, according to:(a) Greeks, (b) Hobbes, (c) Locke, (d) Rousseau, (e) Burke?

3 sep/powers,Plato → Montesquieu

4 social contract →many unconsist conclusns. Why?

1/15/2016 84

teleology v. deontologyTeleology = nature & purpose

consequentialismutilitarianismBentham, Mill

Deontology = non-purposive(not cost/benefit)Kantimitation principlecategorical impertv

15

1/15/2016 85

problems1 Utilitarianism & slavery--slave owners wd like.

But Kantianism opposes; why?

2 Utilitarianism & vulnerable minorities: how treat ADA, confiscation of amusemt park?

3 Kant: conflicting categorical impo? (performance of promise illegal?)

4 Kant: must you tell truth to terrorist (neighbor in closet?) or: contract bankrupts promisor w/negligible benefit

1/15/2016 86

more historyHegel

dialecticcommunitarianism

Marxdialecticalstruggle →classlessness

NietzchealienationUbermenschenexistentialism

1 dialectics and “compassnt conserv”2 Marxism: growth & retrenchmt3 Fascists liked Nietzche: why?

1/15/2016 87

modern political theoryclassical liberalism

Mill, Smith, Jeffersonmodern liberalism

Green: pos freedomBernstein: democ soc

modern conserveconomictraditionalistsocial

1 all econ liberals? or, econ conservs?2-3 Sweden: 3 out of 5 kronas = taxes. Sweden more moral? U.S. more

moral?4 chart: p. 111 inaccuracies?

1/15/2016 88

consequentialism v. deontology: modern issues

pun dmgs seen as mkt corrective, vs as retributive, proportional justicethe Advil problem?death p, drunk drivers?synthesis?diff ways of same thing?

1 conseq; deontol at “borders”?2 BMW v. Gore: reprehens, ratio, comparables--

deontol measures of pun dm? what role for conseq?3 efficient breach/K: conseq? deontol?4 Bok’s “test of publicity”

1/15/2016 89

distributional ethicsRawls’s method

orignl positnperfect knowlgveil of ignorance

Rawls’s conclusionsequality principl (basic rts)difference principl(wealth, status, only if poorest improved)“maximin”

utopian: ’60's - ’70'sNozick

M. Jordan example“night watchmn state”

Calabresitragic choicesstrategics

1/15/2016 90

problems1 Rawls: perfectionism?

projection2 one value (equalty)

at exp of all others(freedom, autonomy, culture, art, future)?

3 1st (equalty) prin: supermajorities, unequal Senate, contract clause, etc.?

4 2d (diff) prin: the Fed’s monetarism, min wage5 Nozick: must have govt;

why must it favor M. Jordan?

16

1/15/2016 91

other ethical ideastrolley problem

only way save 6 isdivert, killing 1

invol org donor:only way save 6 isharvest his organs

indeterminancyrelativismprocess theorytautologysocial m theorydevel m theory

1/15/2016 92

problems1 nonpros of polyg,

S. Utah: Kantian, util, rule util, relativist, process, soc’l theorists?

2 indeterminancy

sex-sel’n abortn

sex-sel’n infantcd

slavery

1/15/2016 93

political: gov’t typesAuthoritarianismTotalitarianism

ideology; 1 party; org terror; control/communicatns, weapons, economy

Democracyaccountable/electn; pop support; competition; openness/ofc; learn pub opinion; rts/minority, dissent

Civic Republicanismcommunitarianism; debate, negotiation; decisions/ neutral decisnmakers

1/15/2016 94

problemswhy democracy?

indiv dignity, autonomyfreedom, equalityrule of lawtransfer powerconfidence/futureecon benefits

how much civic republicanism?constitutionalism

nat’l goalsstructure/govtlawmakg powrlimitsflexibilitychange

1/15/2016 95

problems1 people’s democracies: equality2 democratizatn/Russia3 separation/judiciary4 3-member “presidency?”5 unelected ofcrs

fed judges; state bureaucracy(indepndnc, consistncy, continuity, comptncy)

6 whose democracy?children & child abuse

1/15/2016 96

Arrow’s TheoremArrow’s Theorem

J1: P > D > NJ2: D > N > PJ3: N > P > D

“cycling”generalityClinton elect’n: runoff?other methods: supermajority, markets1 cycling; inconsistency (Easterbrook)2 changing order: decide juris first3 blame ct for inconsis?4 strategic vote: J2 votes “N”5 log rolling? party whip?

17

1/15/2016 97

the Madisonian DilemmaMadison Dilemmamajority ruleminority protect’ncan’t have both, perfectlypolitical branches vs. judiciaryjudiciary anti-democratic?Carolene formula:

specific violpol processdiscr/ins minorities

1 Carolene work?(abortion: which is discr/ins minor?)

2 Ely’s theory:process/ctsintervene(non-interpretivist? idiosyncratic?)

1/15/2016 98

parliamentary v. separation/powersparliamentaryvoters → reps → execsep/powersvoters reps

exec1 preconst: cong elect pres?2 better resolutn Madsn dilemma, sep/powers? (or just tilt twd

minority?)3 sep/powers = pork?4 line item veto = closer to parl?5 sep/powers & military: Powell6 sep/powers, declare war?7 Arrow’s?8 Venezuela--how?

1/15/2016 99

political partiespolitical partiesantidote/Arrowrecruit; educ; “bridge”; packages; org/goot; incentivestrength: parl; central; discpln; spoils1 weakness, Amer2 costs/benefits

weakness: turnout, platfms, sp interests, stability, locl control

3 tensn: pty loyalty, constituency, indep4 bureaucracy

1/15/2016 100

direct v. representativedirect: removes middle; waste & differencerepresentative: informatn, negotpluralism, elitism1 direct/representv?

initiatives; electoral coll2 Walden Two: leave govt to “few . . . assignd?”3 de Tocqueville: U.S., don’t “hate & fear” law4 Partnership A, 3-member gov; B, direct dem5 Apportn stock: 4 w/25%?

40, 20, 20, 20?

1/15/2016 101

property rights and governmentlesser protn?

Friedman:prop → politcontrary

1 Tushnet:const → prop “bad”

2 Rehnquist:not “poor relat’n”

3 Zapata:“la tierra . . . trabaja”

1/15/2016 102

“equality”?A, 50%; B, 30%; C, 20%;divide 30individual? 10/10/10by the shares? 15/9/6coalitional? 20/5/5avoid invidious? [any]1 coalitional “equality”?2 equal--result, opp?3 needs-based, efficient use?4 invidious/affirm: 22 to A, 8 to C, cut out B

murderer, Repub5 define “equal”?6 one pers/, 1 vote?

18

1/15/2016 103

“freedom” versus “equality”freedom v. equalitytradeoffct mandates ABC 10 each: freedom?equalty-mandates impact freedom (by def’n)1 religious landlord, unmarried couple, Calif

Unruh Act2 mandate equality when outweigh freedom lost?

employmt discrimhousing discrimexceptn/small resident

1/15/2016 104

nat’l selection (“evolutn” or “survival/fittest” misleadg?)non-teleologicalchanges in genefrequencies

Dwin fitnessincreases lifetimerepro success

Lamarckian;sp generatn;creationist

“fossil record”punctuated equil

1/15/2016 105

problems1 nat sel & pub health, competitv, taboos

2 vancomycin resistance

3 pub health response to resistance

4 animal offspring abuse

5 computerz “evolutn”

6 “truel” paradox

1/15/2016 106

inverse square relationshipsA = πr2;π = A (1/r2)grav, elec, other phenomena1. proton → elec

Fg = G(m1m2)/r2

m1 = 9.1 x 10-31

m2 = 1.7 x 10-27

r = 5.3 x 10-11

2. proton → elecFe = k(q1xq2)/r2

3. 2 electrons:r1 = 2 x 10-10

r2= 5.3 x 10-11

4. elec force5. analogy:

compliance% 1/(disagreemt) 2

1/15/2016 107

uncertainty principleuncertnty principl,location & momentm impossible to know

simultaneouslygeneral stmt:observatn changesobservd system1. official opp to ct-ordered pris monitors2. cameras/ct rooms3. focus groups, TV, & Heisenberg

1/15/2016 108

1st law thermodynamics:conserv energy2d law: heat, hot → cold bodyentropy increases/all real processesentropy ≈ disorg≈ no. posbl statesClausius’s stmtmath: ÎS = ÎQ/Tif heat Q flowshot → cold, S increasesicemaker: S of ice decreases, of universe increases

19

1/15/2016 109

problems1. rubber band demo2. air conditioning

3. entropy measuremt of indus concentratn?4. analogy: Wilson’s qual-life enforcemt5. Boba Fett’s “evil”6. “good” entropy

1/15/2016 110

what is “science”?empiricist/positivist

“falsifiability,”Popper/Boyle’s Law?

rationalistconcept/theoryNewton/observatn?

quant theoristall 3?1. falsifiability & biol. taxonomy?2. “tachyons” unscientif?3. S.Ct., Daubert--falsifiability, narrow-minded?4. law/justice = sci?5. science in Brown v. Bd of Educ?

1/15/2016 111

models and pragmatismModels:map, not territrymultiple modlslimits/modlsOccam’s razor1. how bad, still usefl?

wave v. photon2. mult model: Erie doct3. Ptolemaic solar, scientif?

epicycles?4. early Copernican scientif?5. “updated, accurate” Ptolemaic?6. acctg/law modls:

inventory, LIFO/FIFOaccel depreciatnnegl/ reas person

1/15/2016 112

Is history scientific?linear history v. critical, analystheologicalcyclicalcomparativescientific: Spengler, Toynbeeinterpreters, emphathistspositivistshist method1. history “scientif”?2. moral inputs?3. fall of Rome?4. game theo, psych, ethics, scientif?5. original intent = empathy6. hist method & rules/evidence

1/15/2016 113

jurisprudence: selected ideasformalisminstrumentalism1. murder statute, construed by each2. Douglas’s penumbra, Black’s no provisnnatural lawpositivism1-2. Iredell & Chase3. rt to define “meaning of universe”?

1/15/2016 114

idealism and realismLangdell’s formalismPound’s socio jurisHolmes & the realists1. Langdell: inductn & deductn2. Holmes’s positivism: anti-logic, nihilistic? Lewellyn’s realismprocess school1. Brandeis brief2. sentence guidelines & process school

20

1/15/2016 115

feminist jurisprudenceKohlberg & Gilligancommun, compromise, interdep, tolerancecritical legal:deconstructioncritical race1. “relational” K’s, ADR2. fem juris hurt women?3. CLS: property, K’s, & pub-pvt: realism? why no

influence?

1/15/2016 116

law & economics1. econ analysis

crim law

2. analysis/voters

& politicians

3. criticisms

1/15/2016 117

interpretive principlesejusdem generisexpressio unius exclusio

alteriusplain meang: no extrinsambiguous: extrinsmergerintent/drafterstype/document1. 9th amend & expressio unius2. “it is a const we/expounding”3. “men committed shameless acts . . . due penalty”

1/15/2016 118

hermeneutics & related ideashermeneuticsholistic approachlaw & literature1. 21-year-old guru: President?2. does “he” mean women excluded?3. Posner: clause by clause. Dworkin:

got to be holistic; Posner’s holistic is clause by clause

1/15/2016 119

modalities of interpretingBobbitt’s 6 Modalitiestextualhistoricalstructuraldoctrinalprudentialethical1. const of death penalty2. different interp of Bible?3. which modalities superior/disfavored?

1/15/2016 120

rulescategorical rulesbalancing rulescomplex rulesmulti-step

neg commerce clauseunevenly wtd balancing

neg commerce clausemulti-factor

regulatory taking

21

1/15/2016 121

probabilities0 0.5 1zero certaintyPossibility coin flip

1:1 odds = 0.51:4 odds = ?(answer: 0.20)probability ofnot - P = (1 - P).

1/15/2016 122

problems1 math expctatn,

lottery: $4 mil, 100 mil to 1, “value” = $0.042 prob of P win = 0.4.

D win? 0. ? . What other info?3 injunctn formula

tradition: “balance” likelihood/success, harm/P, harm /DPosner:P x Hp > (1 - P )Hd

1/15/2016 123

the product ruleproduct ruleindependence1. draw 2 spades, 2 decks?

1/4 x 1/4 = 1/16(0.25 x 0.25 = 0.0625)

2. Collins case: prob of blonde, ponytail, convertible, yellow, Af-Am, mustache, bearda. independent?b. estimates?c. what probs of?

3. cond’l probs: beard-w/-must4. DNA: indep?5. 1 tail, 5 flips?

1st flip, (1/2)5

for ea place, (1/2)5

ˆ 5(1/2)5; n (1/2)n

1/15/2016 124

Bayes’ Theoremliteral use: figurenew prob, based on old prob plus new ev (of

known occurrence)(draw 2 spades, 1 deck)practical use: figure new probability, based

on subjective estmt & new ev, ORfigure cause/eff from non-statistical estmt &

new ev

1/15/2016 125

Bayes examplesExamples:

a. figure prob of paternity from

(1) subjective estmt based on testimony, plus

(2) blood ev

b. figure causal link for disease from weak, non-signif stats plus new ev of known prob

1/15/2016 126

Bayes math—the basic ideaintuitive: new ev changes prob of a proposition, in proportion to the likelihood of seeing the new ev if the proposition is true versus the likelihood of seeing it if the proposition is not true. (prob/paternity of 0.5, or even odds, is greatly increased by blood ev certain to be present upon paternity but rare in populatn)

22

1/15/2016 127

problems—the math1-2. draw 2 cards, 1 deck.Initial Odds of 2nd being spade? 1:3 (0.25).but: what if know 1st, spade?likelihood ratio = Peviftrue

Pevifnot

= prob of 1st being spade if 2nd is spadeprob of 1st being spade if 2nd is not spade

= (12/51) ÷ (13/51) = 12/13so: what are Oddsnew?Oddsnew = Peviftrue

Pevifnot x Oddsinitial

= (12/13) x 1:3 = 0.0923:33. prob paternity:Oddsinitial = 1:1 [=0.5]new ev: blood compatible; 1/100 in populnso: what are Oddsnew?Oddsnew = Peviftrue

Pevifnot x Oddsold

= 1 ÷ (1/1,000) x (1:1)= 1,000:1

1/15/2016 128

fallacies in Bayes reasoningBayes fallacy?1. Is initial probability accurate?

(1:1 paternity?)2. Is new ev ratio accurate?

(is it really 1 in 1,000?)3. an alternative: use as heuristic (chart)4. public policy use: cause (paternity, disease,

crime)

1/15/2016 129

the interval distributioninterval distribn“Poisson process”interval = gap of time/space betw random events distribn = graph of numbers of intervals of each length

betw baseball losses;betw switchbd calls;betw cars enter fwy;betw nubs, bolt/cloth

switchbd, 3 calls/hr, 5 min avg--overlap?mgr assumes periodicity (wrong!)

1/15/2016 130

an example of false interval reasoning3 birth defects in Pleasantville,

1 month!citizens infer cause:pollution!

backgrnd: 3 defects yr, 10 yr.inference fallacious: prob

of 3/month clump ≈ 0.25.absent: periodicity;

large aberrance (100/month);temporal coincidence(cf. power lines)

1/15/2016 131

understanding the interval distributionPoisson distrib:short intervals exponentiallymore common than long.IT % 1/e(TR), decreasing exp function.

if 3/yr, none1 yr (1 yr intvl),6 next yr to “make up”:more short intsprecisely because short!

1/15/2016 132

problems1. seeming paradox (why hard to grasp, short ints more

common than long?)2. “copycat” crime?

school shooting 1 wkafter another in news. blame newspapers?(what is prob of 1 wk interval, T = 1/52 ≈ 0.02,if R = 3/yr? pretty high.)

3. carjackings different?4. tickets, 1/6mos;

intervls > 2 mos.behav mod?

23

1/15/2016 133

statistics: correlationscorrelatn coeff

tells NOTHINGabout whether we can rely on the claim that a correlatn exists!

null hypothesis =no correlation

p-value = probthat data resultfrom null hypoth

1/15/2016 134

statistics terminologyp-val (observed signif level): prob of similarly strong

data from null hypothesishigh p-value (30%): low confidencelow p-value (1%): higher confidencealpha value (α) = preset signif level demandedtype I err = false postype II err = false negpower = likelihood/detecting existing correlatn (β)

1/15/2016 135

problems1-2 biased coin? 5-flip experimt, 4 heads.null hypoth = coin not biased; 4 heads random.set α = 0.05 (or 5%).3 compute p-value, (or prob of 4 of 5 heads; null

hypoth).prob 5 heads = (1/2)5 = 1/32prob 4 heads = 5(1/2)5 = 5/32p = 6/32 = 0.187, almost 20%. ˆ inconclusv.4 graphic view of expermt: Figure 7

1/15/2016 136

problems continued5 now, 10-flip expermt produces 9 heads.p-value = prob/null= (1/2)10 = 10(1/2)10

= 11/1024 = 0.0107.P<α; significant.6 two-tailed test:prob of random 9 heads or tails7 power (β): 10-flipexpmt w 9 heads has more power than 4 heads in 5.

1/15/2016 137

the normal distributionidealized (theoretical)normal distributn equationμ = mean = avgσ = SD = std dev(dispersal)bigger σ = flatter1 compare normal curves:

μ = 0, σ = 0.001μ = 0, σ = 1,000

2 mean: compare mean hts, all college studnts, w mean of varsity basketball

3 pro basketball, ht > 3 SD?Shaquille O’Neal?

1/15/2016 138

statistical estimationcentral limit th:sample of means, large enuf, approaches normal

distributn even if populatn not normal distσ and μ are populatn stats (theoretical)usually: sample; obtain estimatrssample mean = 0, estimatr of μsample SD = s, estimatr of σbecause of central lim theorem, can tell how good

sample by seeing how nearly normal “confidence intvls”

24

1/15/2016 139

confidence issuesexample: what is mean, μ,of Ajax Corp’s applicant typing scores?hypothesis: it exceeds 40.null hypo: μ ≤ 40.set α = 5%; 95% conf intervlfor scores, fig. p. 243:

6 30's, 12 40's, 6 50's, & 6 70's.first step: figure the sample mean, 0.easy: [6(30) + 12(40) + 6(50) + 6(70)]/30 = 46.but: can we rely?how confident?

1/15/2016 140

1. compute s, sample SD.figure deviations & squares30 scores, = 30-46 = -16

(dev)2 = 25640 scores, = 40-46 = -6

(dev)2 = 36 each50 scores, = 50-46 = 4 for 50

(dev)2 = 16 each70 scores, = 70-46 = 24 for 70

(dev)2 = 576 eachsummed sqs = 6(256) + 12(36)

+ 6(16) + 6(576) = 5520.

sum of (deviatns)2

s = q number of data

= 5520 = p 184 = 13.5q 30

2. how well does s fit?are 68% of data, or 18 of 30, within 1 SD of 46? (close: 20)are 95%, or 28.5, w/in 2 SD? (close: 30)

problems

1/15/2016 141

problemsconfidence intervals =

int around estimator,w/ req’d α value

if α = 0.05, sayingμ (mean) = 46 ± 5,means 95% confit’s betw 41 and 51.

1. compute 95%conf int for 0= 46: beyond scope,but gives intervl = 5;0 = 46 ± 5.signif (barely)

1/15/2016 142

problems cont’d2. recall 9 heads

coin flip:95% conf int,10 flips honest,≈ 2 to 8 heads.(replicates signif)

3. Cimino case:ct believed 99%better than 95%shd have figuredconf int for null

1/15/2016 143

errorscensus errors:

validity (scorer not see);reliability (diff scorers);recordation

sampling bias:sample frameconvenience sample (grab)

selection biasnonresponse biasdealing w/ bias:

quotassecondary meascontroldouble blinddisclosure

1/15/2016 144

problems1 bat avg exactly .750,

last yr, .283.misleading?

2 power line problem:compare 1 area to another.sample frame?

3 Hite report:100,000 surveys,5,000 responses.conclusn: “outcry” bias?

4 Hite claims respondents “mirrored” pop.sample bias?nonresp bias?

5 spanked kids behaved worse.bias?hosp has hi mortality rate.bias?

25

1/15/2016 145

the theoretical normal distribution

for theortcl normal:

1 SD ≈ 68% of pop

2 SD ≈ 95%

3 SD ≈ 99.7%

or: approx 68% of

area under norml curve

is w’/in 1 SD of mean.

1/15/2016 146

psychologypsychology “science”?

Skinner’s pigeonsAsch & MilgramGardner’s 7 “intelligncs”Freud, Adler, Horney, Eriksonlearning theory v. theories/personality

1. Freud scientific?2. “mind to behavior & back to mind”3. Freud (or Gardner) allowed/testify? [what if they

know more/anyone else?]

1/15/2016 147

The Diagnostic & Statistical Manual

DSM

deliberate stereotypes?

1. sexual orientatn: “sociopath per disturbnc”; “sexual deviatn”; “pers disorders etc.”; “sexl orientatn disturbnc” (why the changes?)

2. today: “sexl disorder,” “persistnt, marked distress.” (changes “scientific”? why or why not?)

1/15/2016 148

one type of disorderpersonality disorders(“maladaptive”):

narcissistic, dependent,obsessive-compulsv (8 criteria)antisocl (see criteria)

1. the driven doctor:obsessive-compulsv?

2. differences of degree?(some pathologies “good”?)

3. intervention for the driven doctor4. lack/consistency:

the “voices” expermt5. “sociopath,” then “sociopathic pers,” then “antisocial.” scientific?6. Henry Lee Lucas: diagnosable?7. drug/alc dependncy: 13.8%.

a “disorder”?

1/15/2016 149

disorders generallypers disorderspsychosesschizophrenia (types)dissociative disordersdiss amnesiafugueidentity disordermood disordersmajor depressivebipolaranxiety disordersphobiasgeneral anx disorder1. common cold (pers disorder), cancer (schizo)2. split personality3. suicide & depression4. categorize: (a) postpartum disorder, (b) PTSD, (c) somatoforms5. disorders, insanity, crim responsiblty--undiff schizo, severe

1/15/2016 150

etiology and treatmentbiological/genetic modelmedical modellearning theory model

stimulus/responseconditioningexecutive monkey

psychoanalytical modeltreatmt: 1. learning (aversion, systematic desens); 2.

psychotherapy (free assoc, resistance, transference, interp; humanistic); 3. cognitive; 4. medical

26

1/15/2016 151

problems1. schizo etiology:

genetic? med? psych? treatmt:psychotherapy?learn th? med?

2. systematic desens:TV violence? def atty shows gruesome pics early?

3. Seligman’s learned helplessness; useful/ depression? why are attribution, non-universalization, and temporariness relevant?

1/15/2016 152

problems cont’d4. S.Ct.: can’t protect child witness w/out

“particularized need.”

cf. borderline pers:

unpredictable factors.

denial (toughness) may lead to misdiagnosis by judge?

5. cross examining the “shrink”: can’t predict behavior; 5 out of 11 characteristics; disagreemt (what if your witness?)

1/15/2016 153

“Getting Ahead: Does Intelligence or Personality Count More?”

Early on, intelligence

Once learn job, personal skills

Chronicle April 18, 2013

1/15/2016 154

cognitive dissonanceFestinger: cognitive dissonance(inconsistent cognitive inputs = dissonance, discomfort;

people want to reduce)torturer disparages victim; snitch sees law enf as nobleZimbardo’s “prison”behavior → attitudes;when attitudes → behavior?(1) no repercussn;(2) behavior linked;(3) attitude studied

1/15/2016 155

attribution, attraction, persuasion, authority & conformityattributn: to pers, to situation

fund attr error(Napolitan & G)

attraction: exposure, phys, similarity, rewardpersuasion:

audience rewardfamiliar, attractive speakeridentificationframingsmall steps(sign experiment)dissonance: horrible consequences; commitmt authority, conformity (below)

1/15/2016 156

problems1. interrogatn & cog diss: confront falsehood,

omniscience, suggest mitigation2. lawyer persuasn:

(a) jury scenarios; (b) early themes; (c) thank jurors; (d) blaming victim; (e) voir dire commitmts; (f) x-exam, start w/agreemt; (g) “Sarah’s company”; (h) over-repetition

27

1/15/2016 157

conformity and authorityAsch’s conformity expnormative v. informtnl group influenceconformity increase:

insecurity, noncommitted, unanimity, status, size, ambiguityMilgram’s obedience expobedience increase:

status, role model absent, phys proximity, depersonalization1. non-unanimous juries2. group deindividuation3. interrogation: closeness4. groupthink: Bay of Pigs

1/15/2016 158

game theory: payoff matricesBattle/Bismarck Sea

zero sumsaddle pt (Nash eq)

dominant/inadmissvalue of the game“minimax”

1/15/2016 159

problems1. reframe Bismarck as cops & robbers

2. psych impact of framing

3. utility: may not be same for both (e.g., Imamura destroyed/ 2 days)

4. utility matrix, Fig. 6

5. psych effects vs. strategy: Maximizing Diff

players choose lower payoff!

1/15/2016 160

game objectivesmaximax: maximize

best possible outcomeKenney chooses row w/ 3 days, heedless of Imamuraromantic; lottery

maximin: maximizeworst possible outcome

pessimistic; defeatistminimax: minimize

opportunity loss

1/15/2016 161

problemslimit of minimax:uncertainty (Imamura’s Konaranoku bd will tell him, go

south)1. greedy father’s child cust gambit: mother choose

minimax?2. Rawls’s maximin: maximize worst3. lawyer → maximax:

$100,000 offer; 0.5 prob of verdict; 0.1 prob of $500,000; 0.9 prob of $100,0000.5 x [.9($100,000) + .1($500,000)] = $70,000settle! maximax foolish.

1/15/2016 162

mixed strategiesmixed strategy

burglar v. guard:E safe, $10,000W safe, $20,000

mixed strategy:2 red coins, 1 blueguard → 2/3 W;burg → 2/3 E(twice as often to side w/half $!)coin essential?no; inscrutability

28

1/15/2016 163

problems1. larger matrix

2. mult saddles: all equivalent

3. Morra: call 1, 2, 3; put out fingers.

9 x 9 = 81 sq.(?)

mixed strategy, 5/12, 4/12, 3/12; die + coin(?)

4. every finite game solvable

1/15/2016 164

psychology of gamespsychology: people play saddle games well; NOT non-saddled.dollar auction: 2d player pays his bidevents: 2d bid; over 50¢; over $1.Concorde fallacy

entrapmt/escalatnastonishing frequency

1. auction strategy and “lock-in”2. motivational change:

men v. women3. the uneconomical, unresolvable dispute, labor strike, arms race

1/15/2016 165

military strategyM-E-T-T-T cklistintelligence, flexibility, maneuver, surprise“paradox”: “reversal”; bad is good1. concentrated force2. positional flexibility3. simplicity: “friction”4. unified command5. surprise & paradox6. economy of force7. protection/command8. center of gravity9. initiative/reactive10. scarcities/attrition11. timing12. culminating pointfight outnumbered & win1. frontal attack2. flanking3. infiltration4. penetration5. turning movemt

1/15/2016 166

1/15/2016 167

problems1. tradeoffs: concentration v. maneuver, maneuver v.

command, surprise v. timing, etc.2. choosing maneuver: METTT. turning: dug-in enemy.

infiltratn: punctuated lines. when (a) flanking? (b) penetration?

3. least expectatn: Israel v. Syria; bad-road attack, diversion for frontal(!)

4. suicide pass as primary strategy? consider flexibility, concentrated force, protection/command, complexity, surprise

5. lawyer litigation tactics, (a) thru (h)6. culminating pt, litigation?

1/15/2016 168

rules of combatrules of engagemt?clandestine/open viol1. animal ordinance: guilty if “not in business/boarding

animals”?2. “intentional” grounding?3. world “less moral”? Saddam’s mustard gas, etc.: just

desserts?4. strategies/rulewriting: detectable; each elt provable;

principled/fair; automatic enforcemt5. avoiding behavior: consider dollar auction! outside

mentors; don’t try to outdo; deal w/failure; don’t expect ideal enforcemt; tactful “no”

29

1/15/2016 169

mixed-motive gamesBattle of the Sexes

Chicken

1. contrast to Bismarck2. madman/lock-in (particularly Chicken)3. reframing Chicken: “Child Custody Suit”

1/15/2016 170

the prisoner’s dilemmaPrisoners’ Dilemma1. reframe as Arms Race2. reframe as Golden Rule3. effect of communicatn?Iterated game; AxelrodTit for Tat (“TFT”)1. nice, retaliatory, forgiving & clear?2. compare Joss to TFT?3. last-move nastiness?4. compare TFTT to TFT?5. Axelrod’s nat selectn?6. compare to Perlmutter’s lawsuit letter?7. psych differences: men and women8. maximizing diff game: perverse

1/15/2016 171

rhetoric: questioning/listeninginvestigative ?-ingfunnel sequence: narration, exhaust, specific1. depositions2. tell me what happened? is that all? difference/trial3. manager/doc examplesactive listen: (a) repeat, (b) ask, (c) repeat what’s added (& ask), (d) ask what do, (e) repeat, (f) tell what agree, (g) negotiate1. psychotherapy2. when not to use?3. agitated/abusive4. urge to defend5. “I” statemts

1/15/2016 172

barriers to communicationsocial resistance: status

incong, etiquette, hostilitycognitive: goal inconsis,

self-esteem, repression, perceived irrel., memorymanifestation v. causefalsehoods & story theory

[Russell’s chicken]resistance, passive aggreasons for resistanceinconsistencyfalsehood from truth--tellers: suggestion, confabulatn, hardeningworst method: demeanor

1/15/2016 173

overcoming barriersovercoming barriers

communicate expectatnauthority/conformityempathy/diss reductnmotivational stmtsconfidentiality promisetiming/small stepsconfrontation: “clarificatn,” role-play (indirect), direct

1. Clinton/Lewinsky:soc’l factors, goal inconsis, self-esteem, perceived irrel

2. Clinton: indicatns/falsehood; why associates duped?3. Clinton: use of techniques

1/15/2016 174

persuasionpersuasion: Aristotlesimple, clear, expressivesymbolic detailconnotationsraise/lower the stduse opponent’s rhetoric1. restaurant selling:

“nice, crispy fries”2. doctor’s analogy3. D atty: “drunk driving” case, “machine” (intoxylizer)

Pros: “driving under influence”; “instrument”

30

1/15/2016 175

negotiation1. firm fair offer2. conceal settl pt (unreas

offer)3. opponent, 1st reas4. irrationality5. blame client6. mediator7. merits8. appeal/mercy9. bargain vs. self10. bargain vs. each other11. ganging up12. clubbiness13. timing

14. activity15. collateral cons.16. lock-in17. focal pt18. drafter19. agenda20. false demand21. reverse psych22. phys factors23. involve princpl24. good feelings25. test/strength

1/15/2016 176

problems1. ethical?

“make deal, reject, raise demands”2. importance/lawyers3. merits--irrelevant?

[both, maximin?]4. (a) no liability; out-pocket only (b) get w/client & make

offer, I’ll see if can get mineto accept (c) client unreasonable, offer 5000more (d) do what’s fair(e) I’ll make deal w/other defs(f) last thing she wants is cashed out

1/15/2016 177