NotesFAQContact Us
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED248550
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 1984-Sep
Pages: 17
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: N/A
Argumentation and Debate and the Pre-Law Program: Some Considerations.
Fadely, Dean
Many students entering law school are surprised to find that the debating activities there (moot court, mock trial work, and trial advocacy courses) bear little resemblance to the debating they did at the undergraduate level. Those who teach, whether speech communication or prelaw, have an obligation to communicate to students the differences between the processes that occur in the courts of reason, such as academic debate, and those that take place in the courts of law. In both courts, evidential inputs normally begin the decision making process. However, the court of reason relies on authoritative testimony, the court of law on direct evidence. In a court of reason, much of the evidence is admitted unless the judge or judges permit it. Receivers in the courts of reason and law serve essentially similar functions. The differences lie in how the receivers come to be in their respective courts (self-selected or summoned) and in the degree of rigor involved in the evidential evaluation and decision making present in each court. In the court of reason, expectations for evaluation performance vary with the situation and circumstances. In the court of law, performance expectations of receivers are always high, and, unlike the court of reason, continuous efforts are made in order that these expectations can be met. The final difference to be considered lies in the nature of the judgment that the receivers render. The policy decisions produced in the court of law can have effects equal to, or greater than, those promulgated by the courts of reason. (HTH)
Publication Type: Opinion Papers; Speeches/Meeting Papers
Education Level: N/A
Audience: Teachers; Practitioners
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A