As humans, we're always comparing ourselves to others. We compare our intelligence, our looks, our careers, and our achievements. We're always looking for ways to measure ourselves against others, to see how we stack up. One comparison that has been made time and time again is between lawyers and movie writers. It's a comparison that's been debated for years, with arguments on both sides. Some people believe that lawyers are smarter than movie writers, while others believe the opposite. In this blog post, we'll explore the topic and try to come to a conclusion. First, let's look at the argument in favor of lawyers being smarter than movie writers. The main argument is that lawyers have to go through a long and grueling education process before they can practice law. They have to study for years, pass multiple exams, and complete internships before they can even begin to practice law. This process is rigorous and requires a lot of dedication and hard work. On the other hand, movie writers don't have to go through this rigorous education process. They can learn the craft on their own, or through a less rigorous education program. This argument suggests that lawyers are smarter because they have had to go through a more rigorous education process. However, this argument is flawed. Just because someone goes through a rigorous education process doesn't necessarily mean that they're smarter. It just means that they've gone through a rigorous education process. Additionally, there are many other factors that contribute to intelligence, such as creativity, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills. These skills are just as important as having a rigorous education. In fact, some would argue that creativity and critical thinking are more important than having a rigorous education. So, while lawyers may have gone through a more rigorous education process, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're smarter. Now let's look at the argument in favor of movie writers being smarter than lawyers. The main argument is that movie writers have to be creative and come up with unique and interesting storylines. They have to be able to think outside the box and create characters and worlds that are believable and engaging. This requires a lot of creativity and imagination. Additionally, movie writers have to be able to tell a story in a way that is compelling and makes sense. This requires critical thinking and problem-solving skills. This argument suggests that movie writers are smarter because they have to be creative and think critically. This argument is much stronger than the argument in favor of lawyers being smarter. Creativity and critical thinking are essential skills, not just in the world of movie writing, but in all aspects of life. Being able to think outside the box and come up with unique ideas is a valuable skill that is highly sought after in many industries. Additionally, being able to think critically and problem-solve is an important skill that is necessary for success in any field. So, while lawyers may have a more rigorous education process, that doesn't necessarily mean that they're smarter than movie writers. Another profession that often gets compared to lawyers is tabloid or television writers. Some may argue that lawyers are smarter due to their rigorous training and education, but tabloid or television writers also require a certain level of intelligence and critical thinking skills to create compelling and engaging content. Ultimately, it is important to recognize that intelligence cannot be measured by one's profession or education level alone, and that each profession requires its own unique set of skills and talents. In addition to their education and training, lawyers are also expected to be skilled storytellers. They must be able to present their arguments in a compelling and persuasive manner to judges and juries. This skill is particularly important in the courtroom, where lawyers must be able to capture the attention of their audience and convey complex legal concepts in a way that is easy to understand. While tabloid writers, TV writers, and movie writers may also be skilled at crafting stories, lawyers have the added challenge of doing so within the confines of legal parameters and ethical considerations.
by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting
by Ryan H. Flax (Former) Managing Director, Litigation Consulting A2L Consulting
by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting
by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting Nancy Duarte is a well-known graphic designer, author and speaker who is probably best known for helping Al Gore put together his slide presentation for An Inconvenient Truth. The design philosophy and communication lessons she espouses are equally valuable to corporate presenters and litigators preparing trial presentations.
by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting
Compared with even the largest law firms, we go to trial a lot. After all, even the busiest litigators in major firms try at most 30 cases in their lifetimes. We consult on many more cases than that in a year. Indeed, we have spent 20 years going to trial, and our clients are mostly major law firms that are working on very high-stakes cases.
by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting
Much has been written about the hero's journey as Joseph Campbell described it in his seminal work, The Hero with a Thousand Faces. In this 1949 book, Campbell asserts that storytellers worldwide, in their best stories, have for centuries used a story structure that he calls the monomyth. From Beowulf to Ulysses to Luke Skywalker, the pattern is seen over the ages.
As a seasoned trial consultant with years of experience in the courtroom, I have witnessed countless closing arguments that simply failed to connect the dots. The closing argument is a crucial part of the trial process, as it provides the opportunity to tie up all the loose ends and present your case in a compelling and concise manner. A well-crafted closing argument can truly be the difference between winning and losing a case. In this blog post, I will delve deeper into why it is essential to tie up loose ends throughout the trial, starting from the opening statement.
by Ken Lopez Founder/CEO A2L Consulting I frequently help lawyers craft presentations – whether it’s the opening statement of a litigator, a pitch presentation for a law firm, or a seminar presentation for a corporate lawyer. And I too am often called upon to speak at events or even off the cuff to a group. After a good bit of trial and error, I have found two nearly foolproof ways of organizing any of these talks that I use almost invariably, whatever the context may be. The great thing about these models is that you can use them in an off-the-cuff speech just as well as you can in a highly scripted presentation. Whether it's the courtroom or your kid's school, these models work wonders. You will come off as inspiring, not just informative. You will appear confident. You will also be seen as following modern presentation styles – the spoken equivalent of using an electronic presentation versus using transparent overhead slides.
Share: