Care Daniel Klint Richter M.

EPR

BS Legal Management 2A RHETORIC

STUDYING LAW

students "experience a linguistic rupture, a shift in how they understand and use
language, once they begin law school. impacts not just how well they
comprehend how to utilize language, but their perceptions of the law's operation
and application to them.

Their opinions are informed by the frequent legal discussions that reflect
Socrates' and Callicles' viewpoints that the law is nothing but rules. or total
power. In opposition to these interpretations of the legal discussion, I aim to
provide law students with a rhetorical space in this article. stand in the way of
power and reason. This idea has two justifications: first, introducing Students'
exposure to rhetoric allows them to visualize their attorneys' positive, efficient,
and creative roles while based on language, compelling argument, and the law.
Next, by using rhetoric to discuss the "effects of texts," law professors to better
comprehend the law school classroom while also integrating their own work and
teaching as a community of rhetoric. Rhetoric for law students provides a strong
counter to the constrained view of the life of lawyers offered by popular
depictions of formalism or realism.

Advocates of legalism or formalism are typically stated to think that the real
version of the facts can be "found," the meaning of legal norms may be
established, and reasoning may be used to get certain outcomes. In contrast to
this version of formalism, political realists assert that despite the meaning being
frequently ambiguous and When facts are unclear, judges must nonetheless
make decisions. To do Therefore, realists assert, judges will inevitably consult
their own, political convictions or ideologies. In contrast to these representations,
rhetoric examines how the law explores the process of producing meaning, one
that the Law is "constituted" by those who are situated in specific historical and
cultural communities to discuss, debate, and write about determining legal
issues. considers rhetoric as a skill, not a tool, even an art. In this context and for
the time being, ambiguous questions are resolved not as an art of persuasion but
rather as an engaged process of persuasion and debate. By treating rhetoric this
way, it is prevented from being dismissed as a collection of literary tricks.
linguistic gimmicks that skip over and contribute only a bit to legal
argumentation’s real substance. As opposed to that, it emphasizes the rhetorical
process as perception, comprehension, and expression are all fundamental.
 SCRIPT COMPLIANCE
students "experience a linguistic
rupture, a shift in how they understand
and use language, once they begin law
school. impacts not just how well they Pathos, Ethos
comprehend how to utilize language,
but their perceptions of the law's
operation and application to them.

Their opinions are informed by the

frequent legal discussions that reflect
Socrates' and Callicles' viewpoints
that the law is nothing but rules. or
total power. In opposition to these
interpretations of the legal discussion,
I aim to provide law students with a
rhetorical space in this article. stand in
the way of power and reason. This idea
has two justifications:rbdfirst, Ethos, Pathos, Logos
introducing Students' exposure to
rhetoric allows them to visualize their
attorneys' positive, efficient, and
creative roles while based on
language, compelling argument, and
the law. Next, by using rhetoric to
discuss the "effects of texts," law
professors to better comprehend the
law school classroom while also
integrating their own work and
teaching as a community of rhetoric.
Rhetoric for law students provides a
strong counter to the constrained view
of the life of lawyers offered by popular
depictions of formalism or realism.

Advocates of legalism or formalism

are typically stated to think that the
real version of the facts can be
"found," the meaning of legal norms
may be established, and reasoning
may be used to get certain outcomes.
In contrast to this version of formalism,
political realists assert that despite the
meaning being frequently ambiguous
and When facts are unclear, judges Ethos, Logos, Pathos,
must nonetheless make decisions. To Transitional devise
do Therefore, realists assert, judges
will inevitably consult their own,
political convictions or ideologies. In
contrast to these representations,
rhetoric examines how the law
explores the process of producing
meaning, one that the Law is
"constituted" by those who are
situated in specific historical and
cultural communities to discuss,
debate, and write about determining
legal issues.
considers rhetoric as a skill, not a tool,
even an art. In this context and for the
time being, ambiguous questions are
resolved not as an art of persuasion
but rather as an engaged process of
persuasion and debate. By treating
rhetoric this way, it is prevented from
being dismissed as a collection of
Ethos, Pathos, Logos
literary tricks. linguistic gimmicks that
skip over and contribute only a bit to
legal argumentation’s real substance.
As opposed to that, it emphasizes the
rhetorical process as perception,
comprehension, and expression are all
fundamental.