December 4, 2011
New Scholarship on Responding to Opposing Arguments
Scott Fruehwald recently posted a persuasive writing article, Responding to Opposing Arguments and Distinguishing Cases in Persuasive Writing, on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
Legal writing involves learning a number of "miniskills." To become an expert in legal writing, a student must learn case analysis, case synthesis, analogical reasoning, rule-based reasoning, small-scale organization, etc. Among these miniskills is the ability to respond to the opposition’s arguments, including the miniskill of distinguishing cases. These miniskills are vital to an expert brief.
In this paper, I will discuss how to respond to the otherside’s arguments and how to distinguish cases. Part II of the paper will examine when and where to respond to opposing arguments. It will explain where in the litigation to put counterargument and where in the brief. Part III will present ways to counter opposing arguments and unfavorable cases. This part will cover general ways to respond to opposing arguments, how to distinguish cases, and how to use rule-based reasoning. The final part will discuss persuasiveness in counterarguments.
December 4, 2011 | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference New Scholarship on Responding to Opposing Arguments: