Argumentsaretheprimarytoolsofourtradeandwecannotusethem

effectivelyunlessweunderstandandobeytherulesoflogic.Despitetheir
import,moststudentsdonothaveanopportunitytostudytheprinciplesof
logicinlawschool.Ifindthistragicandbelievethatlogicshouldbearequired
courseforalllawstudents.
Inthemeantime,lawyersandlawstudentsmusttakeituponthemselvesto
learntheprinciplesoflogicnecessarytocraftpersuasivearguments.Inthis
post,Iofferabasicprimeronthreetoolsoflogicthatareparticularlyimportant
inthepracticeoflaw:deductivereasoning,inductivereasoningby
generalization,andinductivereasoningbyanalogy.
Resources
IhighlyrecommendthatallLawyeristreaderscheckoutJudgeRuggero
AldisertsexcellentbookLogicforLawyers:AGuidetoClearLegal
Thinking.Ifyoudonthavethetimeorinclinationtoreadanentirebookonthe
subject,JudgeAldisertalsocoauthoredthearticleLogicforLawStudents:
HowtoThinkLikeaLawyer,whichisgreatreadingforlawyersandstudents
alike.ThefollowingprimersummarizesthekeypointsinJudgeAldiserts
article.
Deductivereasoning
Indeductivereasoning,aconclusioniscompelledbyknownfacts.Deductionis
oftenexpressedintheformofasyllogism,inwhichaconclusionisinferred
fromtwoknownpremises.Themostubiquitoussyllogismis:
Allmenaremortal.
Socratesisaman.
ThereforeSocratesismortal.

Firstyouhavethemajorpremise,whichisusuallyabroadandgenerally
applicabletruth;here,thatallmenaremortal.Thenyouhavetheminor
premise,whichisusuallyamorespecificandnarrowlyapplicablefact;here,
thatSocratesisaman.Andtheconclusionistrueasaconsequenceofthe
premises;here,thatSocratesismortal.
Theprinciplebehindasyllogismisthatwhatistrueoftheuniversalisalsotrue
ofthespecific.Indeductivereasoning,youreasonfromthegeneraltothe

particular,soitisessentialthatthegeneralstatementisauniversaltruth.
Considerthefollowingflawedsyllogism:
Somemenaretall.
Socratesisaman.
ThereforeSocratesistall.

Thestatement,somemenaretalldoesnotallowyoutodeductthatif
Socratesisaman,thenhemustbetall.Unfortunately,legalwritingisreplete
withflawedsyllogisms.Dontanchoryourownargumentsinflawed
syllogisms.Anduseyourknowledgeoflogictoexposetheflawedsyllogisms
intheargumentsofopposingcounsel.Wordstowatchfor
include:some,certain,a,one,this,that,sometimes,many,occasionally,onceo
rsomewhere.
Tounderscoretheimportanceofdeductivereasoninginlaw,JudgeAldisert
outlinessyllogismsfromseveralwatershedSupremeCourtopinions,including
thefollowingsyllogismfromMarburyv.Madison:
TheJudicialDepartmentsprovinceanddutyistosaywhatthelawis.
TheSupremeCourtistheJudicialDepartment.
TheSupremeCourtsprovinceanddutyistosaywhatthelawis.

Lawstudentsshouldidentifysyllogismswhenreadingcasesandusesyllogisms
intheiroutlinesandonexams.Notethatyouwilloftenhavetorearrange
sentencestolocatethesyllogismsincasesorothertexts.Andsometimes,only
partofthesyllogismwillactuallybeexpressed.Writersoftenomitpartsofa
syllogism,suchaswhenapremiseisobvious.Informalsyllogismsinwhich
thereisanunstatedpremiseareknownasenthymemes.Moreover,legal
argumentsoftenconsistofseveralsyllogismswhichbuildononeanother,
knownaspolysyllogisms.Hereisanexample:
Allmenaremortal.Socratesisaman.ThereforeSocratesismortal.
Allmortalsdie.Socratesismortal.ThereforeSocratescandie.
Peoplewhocandiearenotgods.Socratescandie.ThereforeSocratesisnotagod.

Aslawyers,weshouldensurethatalldeductiveargumentsinourbriefsand
memosaresupportedbysoundsyllogisms.TheJudgeoffersthefollowing
genericmodel,usedbyprosecutorsincriminalcases,asastartingpointto
createyourownsyllogisms:

[Doingsomething][violatesthelaw.]
[Thedefendant][didsomething.]
[Thereforethedefendant][violatedthelaw.]

Syllogismsaretoolstohelpyouevaluateandtightenyourlegalanalysis.They
areusefulinoutliningyourargumentsordeconstructingtheargumentsof
others.Buttobelogicallysound,yourargumentsdonotneedtobeexpressed
throughsyllogisms.Thetruthofapremisemaybesoobviousthatwritingthe
premisewouldmakeyourwritingtedious,particularlygiventhatwewritefor
sophisticatedaudiences.
Inductivereasoningbygeneralization
Whenyoucannotrelyonuniversalsorsettledlawtoprovideamajorpremise
tocompelyourconclusion,youneedtobuildyourownmajorpremise
throughinductivereasoning.Inductivereasoningbygeneralizationusesseveral
specificfactstocreateatheorythatexplainsrelationshipsbetweenthosefacts
andsupportsyourconclusion.TheJudgeoffersthefollowingexample:
PlatowasamanandPlatowasmortal.
JuliusCaeserwasamanandJuliusCaeserwasmortal.
GeorgeWashingtonwasamanandGeorgeWashingtonwasmortal.
JohnMarshallwasamanandJohnMarshallwasmortal.
RonaldReaganisamanandRonaldReaganismortal.
Therefore,allmenaremortal.

Touseinductivereasoningsuccessfully,youneedtoensurethatyour
supportingfactsrepresentanappropriatesamplesizeandarerepresentative.
Withinductivereasoning,youcanneverbecertainthatyourconclusionistrue,
butthroughyoursupportingfacts,youshouldbeabletoestablishthatyour
conclusionishighlyprobable.
Inductivereasoningbyanalogy
Anotherformofinductivereasoningcommoninlawisanalogy,inwhichyou
makeonetoonecomparisonsanddrawsimilaritiesbetweentwodifferent
things.Ratherthanreasoningfromthegeneraltothespecific(deductive
reasoning)orfromthespecifictothegeneral(generalizations),analogy
requiresreasoningfromthespecifictothespecific.
Analogyisacommonpartofeverydaylifeandlegalpractice.Forinstance,I
amalawyerandIfindLawyeristtobeusefultomypractice,soIassumeother

lawyerswillfindLawyeristusefultotheirpractice,aswell.TheJudgeoffers
thefollowingformulaforananalogy:
AhascharacteristicY.
BhascharacteristicY.
AalsohascharacteristicZ.
BecauseAandBbothhavecharacteristicY,weconcludethatBalsosharescharacteristicZ.

Touseanalogyinlaw,theJudgesuggeststhatyou(1)establishsimilarities
betweentwocases;(2)announcetheruleoflawembeddedinthefirstcase;and
(3)applytheruleoflawtothesecondcase.Successfulanalogydependsonthe
relevancyofthecomparison.Itisthereforeimportanttodetailthesimilarities
betweenthecasesandtoacknowledgetheirdifferences.Youmustestablish
thattherelevantsimilaritiesoutweightherelevantdifferencesandthereforethe
outcomesshouldbethesame.