Rating: 
Summary: How to Argue and Win Everytime: a revisit
Review: I read Gerry Spence's book and applaud his fine work. This book is not just about arguing and winning, it is also about the "how." How to argue and win. In some unusual and perhaps strange way after reading Mr. Spence's book I felt a more gentle and non-aggressive stance was necessary. Mr. Spence's refers to the heart zone as this place where we as humans feel who we are (this is what I understood to mean). I would recommend this book for anyone, I do mean anyone, who is interested in arguing and non-arguing alike. It may seem at first a contradiction. But it is a book to enlighten thought and different ways to approach an arugment. We, unfortunately, are led to believe that all arguments have to be vocal, aggressive, confrontational, and who is stronger than who. I did not find this, thankful to that, in Mr. Spence's book. In reading the book I was taken on a journey, an evolving one, to a better understanding of what an argument is and how to approach it. I do recommend this book to a wider audience. I also should caution the reader who is in search of an aggressive argument in quote, "how can you understand your argument if you don't understand the other party's argument?"
Rating: 
Summary: Don't Underrate Freedom
Review: The point of the book is not to persuade you to adopt his point of view, but to adopt your own. It's a lot about freedom of expression, but not his, but freedom for those who don't stand up for what they believe in, even when they are right. I've owned the cassette version for several years and wouldn't think of reading the book when I can hear his argument on tape. I wish I could describe his style. The title is grandiose --and good marketing. I imagine he is a bit grandiose and more than a little self-promoting. But he's got some good ideas to sell, so I don't begrudge the marketing. I read this shortly before winning one of the most important arguments in my life, so it may have been helpful exactly when I needed help. Spence's style of argument borrows from his life. You get a lot of what you'd expect from a lawyer, excerpts from his trials and a brief look at the profession of law. But the courtroom is just a metaphor for a bigger picture. I think the bigger picture is listening to him give advice on standing up for the truth and not flinching when someone tries to cut away at it. I enjoyed his method: imagining mental locks which he matches with verbal keys. He also digs into prejuidice, which seemed like a side trip, but it made sense when he got done. He's got some locks or closed doors of his own, he admits, naming bankers as one group who could just as well stay out on the golf course and not come back. That part made me laugh. How would he know that much about bankers? So I imagined him out on the golf course, with knickers to match his trademark rawhide jacket -- listening in on the conversations. Don't wait for the movie. There might never be one. But you are ready for equal doses of entertainment and insight, get the tape.
Rating: 
Summary: How to state your case.
Review: As the previous reviewers have stated, there are some words of wisdom from the thinking of Gerry Spence. There are also some whoppers, which detract from the book. Spence is verbose, and this also takes away from the book. This makes him seem arrogant. Also, as some of the other reviewers have stated, Spence is liberal and you can sense this from his writings.
One thing this book reinforced in me is speaking from emotion. If you say what is in your gut, it is a more convincing argument for an audience. Spence convinces us through his choice of words and tone. I learned some like minded principles going to Dale Carnegie. Other common sense suggestions such as thinking through what you say, then commiting it to paper are also there.
Suggestions on arguments in the family are also good sense. These are the good points of the book. Most of the rest is just fluff, and can be left to better authors. If one is in the law, this is a great book. Other readers can look for better books on how to get your point across.
Rating:
Summary: A Must Read !
Review: This book changed my life. I had all these thoughts wondering in my head, and Mr. Spence displayed them out on paper in such a wonderful story manner. Anyone who knows anything about people skills, will know the importance of presenting thoughts in a story form. People love stories, they feel for stories, and most of all, they remember stories. This is an important point in Mr. Spence's book. His stories are sensational with compelling arguments. This is not a miracle book that can make an antisocial person into a great orator. You must have some ablity to convey your message. And if you do, this is the book for you. It can change your life. You will see others arguments in a different light. The best argument lets the winner win, without allowing the loser to truly lose. I love this book, just read it, you'll see.
Rating:
Summary: Pretty helpful....
Review: Overall the book presented a lot of good ideas. The best was probably the concept of story-telling. I always looked for better ways of effective communication but never thought of actually rephrasing my dead words into stories that are 'alive'. The listener/reader automatically holds his attention longer and more raptly and it truly works wonders. I totally agree that 'winning is getting what we want'. If only everyone understood it. Very often do you see people exalting over defeating an opponent and goes on to tease or even insult him/her but that is not what we should be doing. If we are right, we should be happy that we have successfully communicated the proper view to the opponent, correcting his view. And if we are wrong, we should be glad that our mistaken view has now been corrected by our opponent. There is no embarassment in 'losing'. In fact, as Gerry Spence rightly puts it, we win on both counts. He got a bit off-track in the last two chapters about children and work but those were the more interesting chapters I guess. I have to disagree with most of his views regarding arguing with children as he seems to write about a rather utopian scenario where your kids will self-discpiline themselves if you give them freedom. Unfortunately, kids abuse the opportunity more often than they use it. But in the end, it clarifies many things about the philosophy about arguments in general and is in indeed worth reading...
Rating: 
Summary: A few good points nestled among the bad
Review: While there were a few good points in the book, there were far more bad ones. Among the good ideas were:
1. Truth is powerful.
2. The use of stories helps involve the listener in a way technical arguments alone cannot.
Among the bad ideas were:
1. Words are virtually irrelevant- the tone conveys your message.
2. The truth can be found in emotions, not logic.
3. You can win every time merely by denying your opponent your permission to beat you. I had heard that one should keep one's argument as pure as possible thereby avoiding to needlessly alienate people through issues unrelated to the main point. The author contradicts this completely by sprinkling his liberal ideology throughout the book, making it significantly more difficult for non-liberals to keep reading. In the beginning, the author says that this book is itself an argument. Well the argument failed to win this reader, and thereby contradicted its title.
Rating:
Summary: Outside Book Review
Review: When I first started reading this book I started reading it because of the title. Once I actually started reading this book it seemed interesting to me, because he has actually gone into cases and sort of knows what hes talkin about. There were certain things in the book that I couldnt agree with though. At one point when he started talking about religion he sort of threw me of course, because he admitted that most of the people in the world are slaves to their own thoughts, and that they are easily "brainwashed". One thing that I did agree with him on was that we are the only ones that can open the door to our minds, because we are the owners of the keys. I thought that overall the book was well written, but most of the book was based on his own experiences and his own opinions of life. I thought that he needed to go out of his box and look more into the things that were around him. Not just his family, dog, law office etc..
Rating: 
Summary: An exposition of verbosity and misguidedness
Review: Spence's book has slivers of utility in it, but suffers from two fatal flaws in any book- verbosity and misguidedness. A common thread that runs through both the bad and kinder reviews is the agreement that Spence is verbose. Legal writing trains one to be concise and technically accurate; not to squander whole pages on simple points. The casual reader will soon become irritated with a clumsy attempt of writing a "how to" book as a poetic epic. More seriously, Spence's viewpoints are questionable at two levels. Firstly, as other reviwers mentioned, he attempts to victimize obviously deplorable characters such as Imelda Marcos without a shred of convincing evidence. Secondly, and more importantly, he makes serious allegations about religion, suggesting that God has power only because man gives it, and worse, that the God is also afflicted by the corrupting nature of power. I have since thrown Spence's book away, and would strongly advise those seeking advice on the art of argument to look elsewhere.
Rating:
Summary: "Misleading title--otherwise a wonderful book"
Review: I read this book seeking advise for myself. I often let others railroad me, and talk over the top of me-as if they know it all. I wish to learn to assert myself, and basically, argue and win more of the time. This book contains the wisdom of a very wise, and winning lawyer. Much can be learned from one who has worn many pairs of shoes, and walked many miles. I would rather have it 'cut and dried', without all the fluff. This book is like a treasure chest, to an aspiring trial lawyer. For the layman, reading this book will not help you negotiate any better, or win more arguments. I'm sure there are better books on the subject.
Rating:
Summary: I have extremely mixed feelings about this book
Review: Well, first I have to say that this book is very well written. I wish I was as good at the use of adjectives as Mr. Spence is. I bought this book thinking it would deal largely with logical structure and identification of fallacies, ect. Instead, this book dealt with none of that but focused entirely on psychological issues such as power and control. This was actually a good thing and I learned a few things from it and made a few realizations about myself when I argue. I should however point out that less then half of the book actually dealt with this. About 60% of the book is dedicated to his own political and philosophical opinions which I personally am totally oppossed to.... He's also defended some real scum bags in his time and tells the reader how he defended this one guy from killing his own wife in front of their children! The defence was insanity, (the guy had a bad childhood but was not insane.) We the reader are asked to step down from our high and mighty pedistools and pity those born under less fortunate circumstances. As usual, not a thought or word is given to the wife, (the real victim.) Mr. Spence also makes some comments that I felt were absurd, (ie we give God power!?)
So I have to say that about half of this book I enjoyed, (the parts that dealt with the actual confrontation of argument, their roots, results, ect.) and half of this book I absolutely hated! So I give this book a rating of 2.5 stars, (I wasen't given this option on the Amazon scoring system so I was forced to round it up to 3 stars.) One reviewer before me said that you might do better to learn about this subject by buying a good book on rhetoric. Another reviewer said that this book could have been reduced from 300 pages to 100 pages. Both were right.
|
