People generally quarrel because they cannot argue.
The Orator persuades and carries all with him, he knows not how; the Rhetorician can prove that he ought to have persuaded and carried all with him.
Those who, in debate, appeal to their qualifications, argue from memory, not from understanding.
Our whole educational system, from the elementary schools to the universities, is increasingly turning out people who have never heard enough conflicting arguments to develop the skills and discipline required to produce a coherent analysis, based on logic and evidence. The implications of having so many people so incapable of confronting opposing arguments with anything besides ad hominem responses reach far.
I have serious doubts about the value of debates in a presidential election. They tend to be a test of reaction time rather than a genuine exposition of the participants' philosophies and programs
You explain right well, and you shew that you understand argument and are not a mere sophist since you accept that which cannot be denied.
Until you can intelligently articulate the other side's position, you are not an adult. You are a liberal.
It was an interesting experience to work alongside the solicitor general's team and then turn around and argue against them. You certainly grow as a lawyer from getting such a varied set of experiences.
You learn on the job. When I was a young lawyer and got a case, I knew nothing about the subject. You start reading, you look for the philosophy behind it, and by the time you are actually in a court of law, you are a master.
Fourteen years in the professor dodge has taught me that one can argue ingeniously on behalf of any theory, applied to any piece of literature. This is rarely harmful, because normally no-one reads such essays.
It's not enough to be right because he [Rick Perry] is right, you got to be persuasively right, got to be intellectually agile, and I think he can do it.
You know, there are only about 10 people in the United States that have ever argued 25 cases before the Supreme Court, this man has won 25 cases before the Supreme Court. He's an overwhelming choice.
As a trial lawyer, intelligence is important only in the sense that it allows you to play the game, if you will. Without it, you don't even have a ticket into the competitive arena. But beyond that, it doesn't get you very far at all.
Be able to defend your arguments in a rational way. Otherwise, all you have is an opinion.
Among the numerous requisites that must concur to complete an author, few are of more importance than an early entrance into the living world. The seed of knowledge may be planted in solitude, but must be cultivated in public. Argumentation may be taught in colleges, and theories formed in retirement; but the artifice of embellishment and the powers of attraction can be gained only by a general converse.
We need to teach our children how to debate the major life issues. Debate strengthens their beliefs and enables them to defend themselves against ideologies that are going to come their way.
Lawyers tend to be bright people. They tend to be-much more than many journalists I've encountered-sticklers for detail and accuracy, and they have a logical way of arguing.
To be considered presidential timber, there has to be a measure in the way you present your argument.
As a rule lawyers tend to want to do whatever they can to win.
I remember in high school thinking that I wanted to be a lawyer, and now I realize I saw that movie 'And Justice for All' when I was a kid and thought, 'That's what lawyers do, and I want to get up and yell and scream in the middle of a courtroom.'
I didn't do too well until my second year, when I realized that there were no right or wrong answers and that my professors were interested only in how well I could develop an argument.
You see, some lawyers have the talent, have the charisma, but no discipline. They come into court unprepared, without having done their research.
Im a soulless lawyer. Give me any opinion and I can argue it.
When you are interviewing someone, you have a chance to follow up, to press, to dig in. In a debate there's 30 seconds for the other guy, too. And the goal is to get them to engage with each other, not to engage you necessarily.
