101 Things I Learned in Law School By Vibeke Norgaard Martin with Matthew Frederick

From the structure of the court system to the mysteries of human motivation, 101 THINGS I LEARNED® IN LAW SCHOOL reveals the intricacies of the legal world through questions big and small: What is a legal precedent? What is foreseeability? How can a hostile witness help one's case? How is legal argument different from other forms of argument? What is the difference between honesty and truthfulness?

Many of the book's tips are helpful bits of information that everyone can use and apply to life. Here are seven tips that you can use to become a better communicator.

Vibeke Norgaard Martin is an attorney in California. She practiced commercial litigation at a major international law firm before turning to civil rights litigation and criminal appeals. She has taught at the Boalt School of Law at the University of California, Berkeley, was a visiting scholar at the Centre for Child Law at the University of Pretoria in South Africa, and worked for the Sierra Leone Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Previously, she clerked for the South African Constitutional Court.

Matthew Frederick, an architect, is the author of 101 Things I Learned® in Architecture School and the creator, editor, and illustrator of the 101 Things I Learned® series. He lives in Hudson, New York.

Your Point

Stop talking when you've made your point.

Begin and end every argument or talking point with the thing you most want the listener to note or remember. Early points tend to be remembered because they aren't yet competing with all the others to come. As one continues to speak, each new word or idea presented to the listener competes for memory space with all the previous words and ideas.

Items at the end of a talk tend to be better remembered because they are recent in memory, and are perhaps still in the working portion of one's memory. Additionally, listener interest is elevated at the conclusion because it is understood as the critical summing up of previous points made - and perhaps not listened to.

The Temperature

Keep it slightly above room temperature.

Rationality is cool; passion is warm. Rationality provides logical justification for a position, while passion provides a human connection to it. Both are needed to advance an argument; an abundance of one will not compensate for a dearth of the other. An argument may be extraordinarily rational, but its correctness alone is unlikely to compel others to care enough to right the wrongs behind. it. An extremely passionate argument may initially attract sympathy, but unmitigated displays of emotion at the expense of rationality will wear thin and eventually prompt others to tune out your message.

Rationality makes an argument worthy. Passion makes it worthwhile.