<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Helps to burn off the fog that law profs relish creating
Review: I can't say it any better than in Aldisert's own words in his chapter on the Socratic Method: "An understanding of the principles of deduction and induction will significantly assist the student in the daily exercise [i.e. the Socratic Method used by law professors in the classroom]. To lack this understanding is to be substantially, if not totally, disadvantaged."
Rating:
Summary: Helps to burn off the fog that law profs relish creating
Review: I can't say it any better than in Aldisert's own words in his chapter on the Socratic Method: "An understanding of the principles of deduction and induction will significantly assist the student in the daily exercise [i.e. the Socratic Method used by law professors in the classroom]. To lack this understanding is to be substantially, if not totally, disadvantaged."
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent book!
Review: If you are preparing for law school or attending law school, then you need to read this book. This book will improve your understanding/analysis of common law and improve your ability to construct legal arguments.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent book!
Review: If you are preparing for law school or attending law school, then you need to read this book. This book will improve your understanding/analysis of common law and improve your ability to construct legal arguments.
Rating:
Summary: Great, but also see Common Sense Rules of Advocacy
Review: In additon to Aldisert's book, also get a practical book on trial advocacy, "Common Sense Rules of Advocacy for Lawyers" (also a wonderful book for 3Ls and new lawyers who want to learn how to be effective advocates). The author, Keith Evans, practiced as a British barrister for a decade and as a California trial lawyer for many years. He also lectured regularly to many American Inns of Court.However, be warned: Common Sense Rules of Advocacy is NOT a book for litigators, but for advocates. What others have said about Evans book: "Valuable review for the old timers and an excellent primer for those who are starting the climb."
-- Jacob A. Stein, Stein, Mitchell & Mezines, Washington, DC "Superb how-to book ...that is refreshingly readable."
-- Karl Tegland, author, "Courtroom Handbook on Washington Evidence" "A wonderful 'Bible' for the trial lawyer who wants to win. If only we had had this in law school!"
-- Browne Greene, Greene, Broillet, Panish & Wheeler, Santa Monica, CA "Even the most experienced trial lawyer can pick up some new techniques here."
-- Frederick C. Moss, Professor, Dedman School of Law, Southern Methodist University "Valuable insights and practical lessons for anyone who advocates for a living."
-- Steve Clymer, J.D., mediator, arbitrator, and facilitator with ACCORD Dispute Resolution Services, Inc. "Remarkable compendium of useful advice."
-- Roxanne Barton Conlin, Roxanne Conlin & Associates, Des Moines, IA (first woman President of Association of Trial Lawyers of America) "Great introduction for the new lawyer and a wonderful learning tool for the advocate with experience."
-- Sherman L. Cohn, Professor, Georgetown University Law Center (first national President of American Inns of Court) "Terrific guidebook."
-- Philip H. Corboy, Corboy & Demetrio, Chicago, IL You can see more testimonials and more information about Evans' book at RulesOfAdvocacy.com. Or search Amazon for ISBN 1587330059.
Rating:
Summary: How to Think Like a Good Lawyer
Review: Judge Aldisert's book cogently explains the fundamental role that logic plays in law. For the law student (or pre-law student), it provides a shortcut to understanding the basics of legal reasoning, including the common law doctrine of precedent, identifying weaknesses in legal arguments, and fashioning winning arguments through syllogisms. The rest of your law school classmates may flail in the darkness of the Socratic Method, but this book illuminates what the prof is attempting to do. I'm an attorney and did not have the benefit of Judge Aldisert's wisdom until after graduation. But he explained many murky concepts that I had only vaguely understood. Before reading the book, I could tell you that one argument was better than another; now I can put my finger on why. This book is for anyone who wants to improve his or her legal reasoning skills.
Rating:
Summary: How to Think Like a Good Lawyer
Review: Judge Aldisert's book cogently explains the fundamental role that logic plays in law. For the law student (or pre-law student), it provides a shortcut to understanding the basics of legal reasoning, including the common law doctrine of precedent, identifying weaknesses in legal arguments, and fashioning winning arguments through syllogisms. The rest of your law school classmates may flail in the darkness of the Socratic Method, but this book illuminates what the prof is attempting to do. I'm an attorney and did not have the benefit of Judge Aldisert's wisdom until after graduation. But he explained many murky concepts that I had only vaguely understood. Before reading the book, I could tell you that one argument was better than another; now I can put my finger on why. This book is for anyone who wants to improve his or her legal reasoning skills.
Rating:
Summary: Highly recommended
Review: The reviewer from San Diego has it spot on. I wish this would have been required reading in law school. It would have been infinitely helpful in dealing with the professors' hide-the-ball obfuscatory nonsense. Senior Judge Aldisert has obviously spent a long time contemplating the subject, thus it will be well worth your time and effort to not just read this book, but to closely study it. Aside from its great value in assisting legal studies, a side benefit of the book is that you'll probably find that you start spotting all sorts of logical fallacies in the world at large. This can be both good and bad, of course. Good for sharpness of mind, bad for romantic/familial relationships. We cannot effectively deal with our loved ones through the strict scrutiny of a legal lens. Be sure to take it off when appropriate. But I'm getting off track here. In short, if you acquire this book before or during law school, consider yourself fortunate.
Rating: 
Summary: Not What I Was Looking For
Review: This book is not what I was looking for. Aldisert basically quotes Copi's book "Introduction to Logic" throughout. I've taken I logic course using the Copi book and recieved an "A-" and I still couldnt grasp what Aldisert tried to say in the book. I wanted a book to help me debate/argue in my pre law courses and this book didnt help. I kept reading and re-reading this book in some hope that it would help me refute arguments and anaylze readings. This book just didnt do the job. Aldisert said in the preface that he updated this book to make it easy to understand, and he failed. I thought this book was going to help me apply logic to my readings. Alidisert just gave a whole bunch of court cases but I didnt see how he used Deductive/Inductive reasoning on it. This book was too vague. I liked the idea of giving us cases to anaylze, but he should broke down the cases step by step so the reader can understand how to apply logic. Simply, he just doesnt show he the reader can apply logic to arguments/readings/everday language. I was very disapointed because by the reviews on Amazon I thought this book was going to do the trick. I recommend "Intorduction to Logic" by Copi for anyone trying to learn how to apply logic, or you can just pick up an LSAT book. This book cost me 50 bucks and i'm going to return this crap as soon as possible !!!
Rating:
Summary: Not What I Was Looking For
Review: This book is not what I was looking for. Aldisert basically quotes Copi's book "Introduction to Logic" throughout. I've taken I logic course using the Copi book and recieved an "A-" and I still couldnt grasp what Aldisert tried to say in the book. I wanted a book to help me debate/argue in my pre law courses and this book didnt help. I kept reading and re-reading this book in some hope that it would help me refute arguments and anaylze readings. This book just didnt do the job. Aldisert said in the preface that he updated this book to make it easy to understand, and he failed. I thought this book was going to help me apply logic to my readings. Alidisert just gave a whole bunch of court cases but I didnt see how he used Deductive/Inductive reasoning on it. This book was too vague. I liked the idea of giving us cases to anaylze, but he should broke down the cases step by step so the reader can understand how to apply logic. Simply, he just doesnt show he the reader can apply logic to arguments/readings/everday language. I was very disapointed because by the reviews on Amazon I thought this book was going to do the trick. I recommend "Intorduction to Logic" by Copi for anyone trying to learn how to apply logic, or you can just pick up an LSAT book. This book cost me 50 bucks and i'm going to return this crap as soon as possible !!!
<< 1 >>
| 
