Professor Martin Pritikin
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
The Logical
Lawyer
1.
Introduce Common Logical Structures
and Approaches
2.
Explain Fundamental Concepts that
Underlie More Complex Legal Analysis
3.
Demystify “Thinking Like a Lawyer”
4.
Provide Tools for Success in Law School,
on the Bar Exam, and in Practice
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Goals
I.
Syllogisms
II.
Syllogisms and Legal Logic: “IRAC”
III.
Syllogisms and Argument
IV.
The Importance of Structure in Logic and
Argument
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Overview
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
I.
Syllogisms
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Syllogisms: The Heart of Logic
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Syllogisms: The Heart of Logic
Definition:
A syllogism is a deductive form of formal
logic that presents two premises that
lead to a conclusion.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
What is a Syllogism?
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
WHAT IN THE WORLD DOES THAT MEAN?!
PREMISE + PREMISE = CONCLUSION
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
What is a Syllogism?
PREMISE:
All humans are mortal.
PREMISE:
The President is human.
CONCLUSION: The President is mortal.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Syllogisms: A Basic Example
PREMISE:
All dogs are blue.
PREMISE:
Fido is a dog.
CONCLUSION: Fido is blue.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Syllogisms: A Basic Example
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
II.
Syllogisms and
Legal Logic
What Do Lawyers Do?
Lawyers serve clients. Lawyers (primarily) address
legal questions or problems.
In doing so, they:
(2) suggest solutions; or
(3) make arguments to achieve a desired
outcome.
In order to do this, they may:
(a) apply rules to factual situations;
(b) argue about what current rules mean; or
(c) argue for changes to the rules.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
(1) predict likely outcomes;
What Do Lawyers Do?
You can’t answer a legal question or problem
unless you know what the question/problem is.
You answer a legal question/problem by applying
rules to factual situations to generate conclusions.
Identifying the rule(s) that (arguably) apply is an
important next step.
Once you identify the rule, only then can you
apply that rule to the facts to generate a conclusion.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Identifying the question or problem to be
addressed is an important first step.
“IRAC”: The Heart of Legal Logic
R = Rule
A = Application (of rule to facts)
C = Conclusion
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
I = Issue
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
There’s No “Magic” to Legal Logic
Legal Logic Is Logic
Answer
I = Issue
R = Rule
Premise
A = Application
Premise
C = Conclusion
Conclusion
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Question
Syllogisms: IRAC in Action
PREMISE:
All dogs are blue.
PREMISE:
Fido is a dog.
CONCLUSION: Fido is blue.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
QUESTION:
Syllogisms: IRAC in Action
QUESTION:
What Color is Fido?
PREMISE:
All dogs are blue.
PREMISE:
Fido is a dog.
Rule
Application
Conclusion
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
CONCLUSION: Fido is blue.
Issue
IRAC: The Importance of the Question
Is Fido a dog?
PREMISE:
All dogs are blue.
PREMISE:
Fido is a dog.
CONCLUSION: Fido is blue.
Issue
Rule
Application
Conclusion
You Have Assumed the Thing You Are
Trying to Prove. This is Circular Logic.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
QUESTION:
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
III.
Syllogisms and
Argument
Syllogisms and Argument
Is Fido blue?
PREMISE:
All dogs are blue.
PREMISE:
Fido is a dog.
Issue
Rule
Application
CONCLUSION: Fido is blue.
Conclusion
Let’s say you wanted to dispute that Fido
was blue. What could you do?
1) Dispute that all dogs are blue.
2) Dispute that Fido is a dog.
3) Expose a flaw in the logic.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
QUESTION:
Is Fido blue?
Is A = C?
All dogs are blue.
All B = C
Fido is a dog.
A=B
Fido is blue.
A
A = Fido
B = Dogs
C = Blue
=C
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Syllogisms and Argument
Syllogisms and Argument
Let’s say you wanted to dispute that Fido
was blue. What could you do?
1) Dispute that all dogs are blue.
3) Expose a flaw in the logic.
Which is the strongest approach?
Disputing that all dogs are blue.
HOW do you know that’s stronger?
Common sense / experience!
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
2) Dispute that Fido is a dog.
Syllogisms and Argument
To dispute the rule or fact would
violate the parameters of the
problem.
READING TIP! Pay attention to whether
you are being asked to assume
something is true, or whether there is
room to dispute it.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
What if you’re told to ASSUME that (1) all
dogs are blue, and (2) Fido is a dog?
Syllogisms and Argument
Is Fido a dog?
PREMISE:
All dogs are blue.
PREMISE:
Fido is blue.
CONCLUSION: Fido is a dog.
Issue
Rule
Application
Conclusion
Let’s say you wanted to dispute that Fido was a
dog. What could you do?
1) Dispute that all dogs are blue.
2) Dispute that Fido is blue.
3) Expose a flaw in the logic.
What is the strongest approach?
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
QUESTION:
Syllogisms and Argument
What is the strongest approach?
Expose a flaw in the logic: All dogs are
blue, but not all blue things are dogs.
If the structure is invalid, the inputs to
the structure are irrelevant.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
HOW do you know that’s the strongest?
Syllogisms and Argument
Is Fido a dog?
Is A = B?
All dogs are blue.
All B = C
A
Fido is dog.
A=B
=C
All B = C ≠ All C = B
A = Fido
B = Dogs
C = Blue
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Fido is a blue.
Syllogisms and Argument
“Plaintiff argues that Fido is a dog because
all dogs are blue, and Fido is blue. However, this
conclusion does not follow. Even assuming that
all dogs are blue, it is not the case that all blue
things are dogs. Blueberries, blue whales, and
bluebirds are just a few examples of blue things
that are not dogs. Thus, proving that Fido is blue
does not prove that he is a dog.
Moreover, it is not the case that all dogs are
blue. It is common knowledge that many dogs
are white, gray, brown, black, or red. In fact,
almost no dogs are blue. Thus, the fact that Fido
is blue does not even suggest that he is a dog.”
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
What might this look like in writing?
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
IV.
The Importance of
Structure in Logic and
Argument
Structure of Argument
What is the RELATIONSHIP, if any,
between the issues?
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
TAKEAWAY:
You should think not only about WHAT
points to make, but what ORDER to make
them in.
Syllogisms: The Importance of Order
Fido is blue.
Fido is a dog.
All dogs are blue.
Issue
Application
Premise
Conclusion
Premise
Rule
Conclusion
This syllogism contains all the right
statements, but because it contains them
in the wrong order, it makes no sense.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Are all dogs blue?
Syllogisms: The Importance of Order
That is why we teach you IRAC.
NOT IARC.
NOT CARI.
IRAC
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
NOT ICAR.
Structure of Argument:
Dependent and Independent Variables
Some variables are dependent on other variables.
You need to discuss the independent variable
before discussing the dependent variable.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Some variables are independent of each other. It
doesn’t matter what order you discuss them in.
 But the order may matter for clarity.
Call of Question: Fluffy gives birth to live young
and feeds them milk. All animals that give birth to
live young and feed their young milk are mammals.
Discuss whether fluffy is a mammal.
Issue
Rule
Application
Answer
“Is Fluffy A Mammal?
All animals that give birth to live young and feed
their young milk are mammals. Here, Fluffy feeds
her young milk, and gives birth to them live.
Conclusion
Therefore, Fluffy is a mammal.”
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Independent Variables and Clarity
Call of Question: Fluffy gives birth to live young
and feeds them milk. All animals that (1) give birth
to live young and (2) feed their young milk are
mammals. Discuss whether fluffy is a mammal.
Issue
Rule
Application
Answer
“Is Fluffy A Mammal?
All animals that give birth to live young and feed
their young milk are mammals. Here, Fluffy feeds
her young milk, and gives birth to them live.
Conclusion
Therefore, Fluffy is a mammal.”
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Independent Variables and Clarity
Call of Question: Fluffy gives birth to live young
and feeds them milk. All animals that (1) give birth
to live young and (2) feed their young milk are
mammals. Discuss whether fluffy is a mammal.
Issue
Rule
Application
Answer
“Is Fluffy A Mammal?
All animals that give birth to live young and feed
their young milk are mammals. Here, Fluffy feeds
her young milk, and gives birth to them live.
Conclusion
Therefore, Fluffy is a mammal.”
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Independent Variables and Clarity
Call of Question: Fluffy gives birth to live young
and feeds them milk. All animals that (1) give birth
to live young and (2) feed their young milk are
mammals. Discuss whether fluffy is a mammal.
Issue
Rule
Application
Answer
“Is Fluffy A Mammal?
All animals that give birth to live young and feed
their young milk are mammals. Here, Fluffy gives
birth to live young and feeds them milk.
Conclusion
Therefore, Fluffy is a mammal.”
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Independent Variables and Clarity
Dependent Variables and Nested Issues
Fido is a dog.
Fido is blue.
All blue things are friendly.
Fido is friendly.
Premise
Premise
Conclusion
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
All dogs are blue.
Dependent Variables and Nested Issues
QUESTION: Is Fido friendly?
Premise
All dogs are blue.
Fido is blue.
Premise
Syllogism 1
(Sub)conclusion / Premise
All blue things are friendly.
Premise
Syllogism 2
Fido is friendly.
Conclusion
The Issues are:
1) Is Fido friendly?
2) Is Fido blue?
Which Issue is Dependent on Which?
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Fido is a dog.
Dependent Variables and Nested Issues

Because all blue things are friendly, if we
can determine that Fido is blue, we will
know he is friendly—which is what we are
trying to prove.

Thus we must first answer whether Fido is
blue, then answer whether he is friendly.
Friendliness is dependent on blueness.
However, since the ultimate issue is whether
Fido is friendly, you might address that issue
first (even though you answer it second):
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Which Issues is Dependent on Which?
Dependent Variables and Nested Issues
However, since the ultimate issue is whether Fido is
friendly, you might address that issue first (even
though you answer it second:
Rule
Analysis
“Is Fido Friendly?
We know that all blue things are friendly. Therefore, in
order to determine whether Fido is friendly, we must
first determine whether he is blue.
Rule
Sub-Issue
Application
Is Fido Blue?
All dogs are blue. Fido is a dog. Therefore, like all
other dogs, Fido is blue.
Sub-Conclusion
Conclusion
Since Fido is blue, he is necessarily friendly.”
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
Main Issue
Discussing Issues Separately
It is important that you IRAC each issue and subissue separately:
GOOD
(Sub)IRA(Sub)C
(Sub)IRA(Sub)C
(Sub)IRA(Sub)C
Conclusion
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
IRA[--]
Discussing Issues Separately
It is important that you IRAC each issue and subissue separately:
IRA[--]
BAD
IRRRRAAAAC
(Sub)IRA(Sub)C
(Sub)IRA(Sub)C
(Sub)IRA(Sub)C
Conclusion
Whether each sub-issue gets its own subheading
and/or separate paragraph depends on how much
there is to say about each. Use your judgment.
Prof. Martin Pritikin Whittier Law
School -- all rights reserved
GOOD