Why Lawyers Are Nice (or Nasty)

Which might be the best strategies for lawyers to maximize success – should they be honest or dishonest (and/or aggressive or passive) ? Researchers Giovanni Sartor, EUI – Florence [pictured] Michel Rudnianski, CNAM/ORT – Paris, Antonino Rotolo, CIRSFID – Bologna, Régis Riveret, University of Aberdeen, and Eunate Mayor, EUI – Florence, offer solutions in their EUI Working Paper LAW2009/08 ‘Why Lawyers Are Nice (or Nasty) : A Game-Theoretical Argumentation Exercise’

Applying Professor Dung’s Abstract Argumentation Framework (see: P. M. Dung. ‘On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming, and n–person games.’ Artificial Intelligence, 77:321–57, 1995) the team are able to determine that : –

“[…] given certain hypotheses concerning the costs of proceeding, the most successful posture for a lawyer is to be non-honest and non-aggressive, followed by being honest and aggressive, then by being honest and non-aggressive, and finally by being non-honest and aggressive. In other words, given that framework, being non-honest pays only when one is non-aggressive, while aggressiveness only pays when coupled with honesty.”

Also see; The pleasure of being nasty.