tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post3745086803648369922..comments2024-03-14T11:09:32.759-05:00Comments on Falkenblog: Rationalizing Versus ReasoningEric Falkensteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-51098629298174767262008-06-11T11:17:00.000-05:002008-06-11T11:17:00.000-05:00This is a side-show to the larger point you're mak...This is a side-show to the larger point you're making, but why not? If by "pattern" you mean taking positions opposite of their previous advocacy and by "advocate" you mean lawyers, what I said about the premise (its wrong) still stands. Most individual legal advocates take the same side in controversy, planning or what have you and generally believe in the positions they are taking. <BR/><BR/>The guys Eliezer is complaining about are, in my experience, academics, kids exercising their new found intellectual capacity, or people who are teasing for the sheer enjoyment of it. The professional class I deal, and I assume you do, generally have strong beliefs and consider devil's advocacy as a kind of circle jerk or for delivering justice to hubris. <BR/><BR/>Take your former employer's attorneys. If they're any good, they probably relish taking this case, they see you like all the other disgruntled employees they deal with, the kind who sign contracts, lay-off risk of your failure on an employer and trade for comfort and for experience in return for a promised wage and then when things turn out well, repudiate all of the foregoing in a spasm of self-entitlement and bad-faith. (Not saying its true at all, I don't know anything about it). Those kind of lawyers believe want to deliver your comeuppance because they believe you deserve it. Those kind of lawyers won't jump to the other side on the next case, they are business lawyers, not personal plaintiff lawyers. <BR/><BR/>Lots of speculation there, but I think its more accurate than the nonsense about lawyers arguing against the positions they took last week.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-77131622647586744232008-06-10T21:41:00.000-05:002008-06-10T21:41:00.000-05:00I guess what I was trying to say is that I think i...I guess what I was trying to say is that I think its reasonable to make an ethical judgment about these advocates based on this pattern, even though they have a right to pursue this advocacy.Eric Falkensteinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07243687157322033496noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7905515.post-54949688677521505972008-06-10T20:15:00.000-05:002008-06-10T20:15:00.000-05:00Your friend and the guy arguing with him are perso...Your friend and the guy arguing with him are personifying a collective. Individual lawyers tend to argue the same side of most issues and come with, or develop, a disposition in favor of that side. Labor, employment, tax, criminal, etc. tend to have the same kind of client over and over.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com