Week 1 Thinking Skills Flashcards
What is it to ‘think like a lawyer?’
A combination of:
a. Legal reasoning skills
b. Critical thinking skills
c. Creative thinking skills
What is Legal Reasoning?
Legal reasoning is a way of thinking that is used by lawyers to solve legal problems, construct legal arguments or prepare advice about the legal consequences of a factual situation.
What is IREAC
- Issue
- Rule
- Explanation of rule
- Application
- Conclusion
Why is it useful to conceptualise legal reasoning as a series of formal steps?
Formalistic techniques help you to remember what needs to be considered when resolving a legal issue.
What is the first step in the IRAC method?
Issue: Clearly and comprehensively state the legal questions that need to be answerd.
What is the second step in the IREAC method?
Rules: Identify the appropriate legal rules needed to resolve the legal issue identified in the previous step.
What is the second part of the second step in the IREAC method?
Elements: Once you have identified the relevant rule, you need to deconstruct the rule and determine the ‘elements’ of the rule. ‘Elements’ in this context refers to the matters that must be satisfied in order for a rule to apply.
What is the third step in the IREAC method?
Application: This is the application of the relevant legal rules to the facts of the problem.
Do you need to think about opposing arguments when you construct an argument?
Yes. It is not possible to construct persuasive arguments without anticipating the nature and strength of the opposing arguments.
What is the fourth step in the IREAC method?
Conclusion: The final step in the process is reaching a conclusion. In a trial, this might be a decision of the court. The final step in preparing impartial advice for a client or an impartial solution to a law school problem is the same.
What is legal reasoning?
Legal reasoning is a form of logical reasoning.
What are the rules of legal logic?
- An argument should take the form of a series of premises followed by a conclusion. (The process of drawing a conclusion from a series of premises is called ‘inference.’)
- A valid argument is preferable to an invalid argument. An argument is ‘valid’ only if the conclusion follows from the premises, and
- A sound argument is preferable to an unsound argument. An argument is ‘sound’ only if the argument is valid and the premises are true.