法律推理不过是……一种论证而已,其目标在于去说服它所适用的对象,让他们相信这一选择、决定或态度比与它并存的其他选择、决定和态度更可取。许多律师对法律论证过程与结构缺乏一种基本的理解。他们那种常常把法律论证看做是连有效辩护术都不如的有限理解源自于法律教育的失败:法律教育未能将法律论证的结构和过程明确地、系统地传授给他们。解决这一问题的方法之一就是去对法律与修辞之 Legal reasoning is but ... an argument whose purpose is to persuade the object to which it applies and to convince them that the choice, the decision or the attitude is more desirable than the alternatives, decisions and attitudes that coexist with it. Many lawyers lack a basic understanding of the process and structure of legal argument. Their limited understanding of legal argumentation as inferior to effective defenses stems from the failure of legal education: legal education fails to explicitly and systematically impart the structure and process of legal argument to them. One way to solve this problem is to go to law and rhetoric