Need PS Advice - Too Political? Forum

[RationalHeretic23]

I was re-reading through the TLS tips on personal statements, and remembered that it is recommended to avoid being too political or talking about contentious issues. My personal statement is largely oriented around my belief in the need for regulation in order to protect the consumer. This is one of my main reasons for pursuing law. Accordingly, my opinion on the matter is quite clear. I'm wondering if perhaps I'm being a tad bit too controversial in this personal statement. Any advice on the matter would be very helpful. Also please feel free to critique any other aspects of the personal statement as well, especially given that this is a new draft and I am definitely in need of some revision. Thanks so much.

"Since I first began to explore my academic interests, my focus has been centered on the study of society. Accordingly, I declared myself a sociology major as a freshman with the aim of understanding the structure and function of society in all its complexity and interconnected facets. What began as positive analysis driven by curiosity, however, quickly transformed into normative analysis driven by passion. In sociological terms, my focus had shifted from pure sociology to applied sociology, that is, from studying society for its own sake to studying society in order to improve it. The impetus for this transformation in focus was my perception of systematic societal injustice and a belief in my potential to ameliorate such conditions. I soon began an enduring cycle of indecisiveness as to whether a Master’s in sociology or a Juris Doctor would better equip me with the tools necessary to address the social problems I feel are in dire need of attention. After my meticulous research of the two career paths failed to resolve my uncertainty, I placed my hope for an answer in the enrollment of an intriguing sociology course: Sociology of Law. With the aid of this course, I stand fully convinced not only that I will benefit from a career in law, but that I will meaningfully contribute to its pledge to seek justice where there is none and preserve justice where it is assaulted.

My enrollment in Sociology of Law was a critical moment in my ultimate decision to pursue my legal education. Whereas studying sociology and law independently of each other gave me an understanding of their distinct attributes as separate fields of study, Sociology of Law gave me an understanding of the interconnectedness of the two fields and their shared resolve to better society, improve lives, and rectify injustice. Prior to taking Sociology of Law, I felt as if pursuing law would entail a symbolic abandonment of my sociological ideals and training. I viewed each field as its own exclusive path in addressing the woes of society. With the aid of this course, I have broken down the illusory boundaries of sociology and law and instead adopted an understanding of the fields as complimentary tools with which to embark on my path towards a career fostering the fight against injustice.

Through taking Sociology of Law, I realized that the legal field offers me an ideal medium through which I may channel my call to action, or in other words, my commitment to the principle behind applied sociology. This assessment is not meant to deprive sociology of its essential role in improving societal conditions, but merely to point out that rigorous sociological investigations into the legal policies capable of bettering society are ultimately dependent upon those in the legal field to put such ideas into action. I strongly feel that the legal field ought to be more receptive to sociological influence, and it is my hope that my traversing the demarcation between sociology and law will do its part in helping unite the two fields in a common effort to create a more just and equitable society.

Informed by sociological theory, I understand that those who seek to maximize their own personal gain will inevitably descend upon the field of law in an effort to utilize its unique power to control the structure and function of society. An honest analysis of history will show that the seduction of human desire will inexorably overtake the minds of those who value the interest of the self over the interest of the common good of the people. I recognize that this self-interested agenda will inevitably coalesce into formal entities, groups, and organizations which seek to influence law and public policy for the gain of an elite minority at the expense of the majority. I am fervently committed to protecting the malleability of society from those who are driven by subjective personal gain to assail justice, stunt societal progress, and compromise the common good of the people. I believe in a legal system that seeks to craft public policy based not upon the subjective interests of those in power, but rather upon an objective analysis of what the evidence reveals to be in the best interest of the common good. Soundly crafted and thoroughly enforced regulation, I have found, offers immense promise in fulfilling this vision.

Regulation, with all of its shortfalls, offers an effective means by which the behavior of the powerful is legally constrained within the confines of a paradigm conducive to the well being of the powerless. Without proper regulation, the beneficiaries of market failures would thrive while the rest of society suffers. Health standards in the food industry, safety standards in the auto industry, and anti-trust standards in the business industry all protect the health of the American consumer from the folly of laissez-faire and its concomitant market failures. I believe this matter demands attention not only from our economists, but also from our attorneys and policymakers. Accordingly, my attention is drawn towards the important regulatory work performed by our federal administrative agencies such as the Federal Trade Commission, Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Election Commission. While many administrative agencies offer me the hope of meaningful employment, I hope to eventually procure my ideal position as an attorney with the Federal Trade Commission’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. My genuine passion for consumer protection makes the prospect of litigating on the consumer’s behalf at the federal level highly desirable.

(Insert Tailored Conclusion Here)"

[Vursz]

I don't think this is too political at all. It's actually quite interesting, and you make good points about the intersection of law and sociology.

Biggest suggestion: lose 90-100% of the SAT words. There's no reason to use the word "inexorably" in a personal statement.

"my traversing the demarcation between sociology and law" --> "studying the connections between sociology and law"

[encore1101]

There's no reason to use the word "inexorably" in a personal statement.

I agree with this. Speak simpler.

[lavarman84]

I don't think this is too political at all. It's actually quite interesting, and you make good points about the intersection of law and sociology.

Biggest suggestion: lose 90-100% of the SAT words. There's no reason to use the word "inexorably" in a personal statement.

"my traversing the demarcation between sociology and law" --> "studying the connections between sociology and law"

I gotta agree. That was my thought reading it. OP, you're a great writer but it feels like you wrote this with a thesaurus next to you. It comes off as not genuine.

You can clearly write effectively. Just don't overdo it with the grandiose language.

[rinkrat19]

This is an essay about your feelings about Sociology in Law. It is not a Personal Statement (key word "personal"). The only thing the reader learns about you, as a person, is what you learned in one class. It's fine to write about a particular class or legal area, but you need to connect it to yourself.

It's also far too long for most schools. Double-spaced, this is 4 pages long, and that's without a conclusion yet. Most schools have limits of 3 or even 2 pages, and the limits should NOT be exceeded.

And I echo everyone else's comments about regurgitating the thesaurus on the page.