In the first episode of How to Think Like a Lawyer, Alexander is joined by James Piercy for a conversation about what it really means to think, reason and argue like a lawyer.
James Piercy is a legal professional and advocate with experience in debating, mooting and appearing before judges. In this episode, he shares insights drawn from his experience studying and practising law, exploring how lawyers develop the ability to analyse complex problems, construct persuasive arguments and communicate with clarity.
What makes someone a good lawyer? Is it knowing the law, being a persuasive speaker, or something deeper? James Piercy explores how legal reasoning, clarity of thought and advocacy shape the way lawyers approach difficult legal problems.
James discusses his experience of mooting and debating, the difference between knowing the law and being able to argue it, and why the strongest legal arguments are often the clearest and simplest. He explains how to structure complex legal issues using checklists, flow charts and clear steps, as well as how signposting can make an argument significantly more persuasive.
The interview also explores advocacy before judges, including how to respond when a judge challenges your argument, why judicial intervention should not be treated as an attack, and how the role of an advocate changes from performance and confrontation to conversation and assistance.
James also reflects on choosing areas of law to explore, finding subjects that genuinely capture your imagination, and what he wishes he had known before starting university.
Topics covered include: legal reasoning, legal analysis, advocacy, mooting, debating, legal argument, persuasive advocacy, judicial intervention, legal education and thinking like a lawyer.
How to Think Like a Lawyer — Episode 01: The Art of Legal Reasoning with James Pierce.