Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Law Firm Directory
Apply to Paul, Weiss
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
🚨 Reed Smith has just announced its Direct Training Contract route!
The deadline is
20th June
.
👉
Read Becca's announcement post here
📝
Apply directly here
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
Applications Discussion
TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Andrei Radu" data-source="post: 210183" data-attributes="member: 36777"><p>I hope this is not too late but my main advice would be to try try to walk the fine line of advocating for your position to the best of your abilities while also avoiding to seem unresponsive to the points the partners make to challenge you. You should be aware that the arguments the partners will make are not always ones which they actually believe would refute your view. One of the main purposes of the article discussion is to test whether you are able to hold your ground when challenged by someone in a position of authority - a skill that every good lawyer needs to develop. As such, if you think a point they made is flawed, or valid but insufficient to persuade you to change your view, you should not back down. </p><p></p><p>At the same time, you want to avoid looking like you're irrational and that you cannot learn during the conversation. Some of the points the partners make will be quite relevant for the debate, and the debate topics are specifically chosen to be ones involving a nuanced cost-benefit analysis and allowing for reasonable disagreement. As such, you should aim to acknowledge and address their points. A move I would often make would be to say something of the sort 'I definitely understand where you are coming from, and I agree this is certainly a drawback of my view/an upshot of yours. However, I do not think the drawback is quite as impactful as you said/I do not think the point should be weighed so heavily because...'. Another option is to accept the relevance of their points and then address them by integrating them into your view: ie 'I agree this might be a problem, but I think under my approach we might hedge against the risk in this way'.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Andrei Radu, post: 210183, member: 36777"] I hope this is not too late but my main advice would be to try try to walk the fine line of advocating for your position to the best of your abilities while also avoiding to seem unresponsive to the points the partners make to challenge you. You should be aware that the arguments the partners will make are not always ones which they actually believe would refute your view. One of the main purposes of the article discussion is to test whether you are able to hold your ground when challenged by someone in a position of authority - a skill that every good lawyer needs to develop. As such, if you think a point they made is flawed, or valid but insufficient to persuade you to change your view, you should not back down. At the same time, you want to avoid looking like you're irrational and that you cannot learn during the conversation. Some of the points the partners make will be quite relevant for the debate, and the debate topics are specifically chosen to be ones involving a nuanced cost-benefit analysis and allowing for reasonable disagreement. As such, you should aim to acknowledge and address their points. A move I would often make would be to say something of the sort 'I definitely understand where you are coming from, and I agree this is certainly a drawback of my view/an upshot of yours. However, I do not think the drawback is quite as impactful as you said/I do not think the point should be weighed so heavily because...'. Another option is to accept the relevance of their points and then address them by integrating them into your view: ie 'I agree this might be a problem, but I think under my approach we might hedge against the risk in this way'. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
Applications Discussion
TCLA Vacation Scheme Applications Discussion Thread 2024-25
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…