Should we think like a litigator?
In my opinion, yes.
In law, as in life, logical reasoning is superior to emotional reasoning. The rational, reasoned decision-maker will beat the emotional decision maker almost every time.
As Naval Ravikant says, the goal is to be the “coolest cucumber in the room”.
But how do we do that?
Lawyers are taught to recognize the “fact pattern” — that is, the objective facts as far as we can know them from the available evidence — and analyze them in light of the governing cases which apply to that fact pattern.
This is a disciplined, objective mental model that removes (or at least attempts to limit) our biases, emotions, and wishful thinking. Here we will examine how best to Think Like a Litigator.
This isn’t a legal blog in the strict sense, however. The project here is to bring in elements of psychology, game theory, logic, philosophy, negotiation and personal development to examine how one can advocate effectively on one’s own behalf, as well as others. Why is this important? Because the world is a complicated place, with individuals constantly pushed and pulled by government, technology, and industry. Now more than ever, a commitment to individual sovereignty, classical liberal values and basic freedoms is needed. We all need to be able to fight the necessary fights. And to do that, we just may need to Think Like a Litigator.