I was defending you before by agreeing that the lower GPAs typical to engineering majors should be more of a factor when engineers apply to law school, but I must say that I find this later posting asinine.
You seem to only value money. Such is a shallow life indeed, as far as I'm concerned. I majored in history and find studying history one of the most worthwhile endeavors we humans can undertake. I have much more natural talent in mathematics than in the humanities, but I choose to study history because I find it intrinsically valuable. I had no vocational goal in mind. I studied some science too, but again with no practical applications in mind. I don't regret it at all. Smart and resourceful people can always find gainful employment (of after taking a silly few hour exam gain admission to a top law school). And even if that were not so, I would rather be poor with some perspective and understanding of life and history than some engineering tool with money. We live in an affluent society. Absent some global catastrophe, we on this board will all live comfortable lives. I envy the people that are satisfied working simple jobs with their history majors. I consider the ambition that drives me to law school a vice and not a virtue. I would not look down on history majors. They will be your bosses some day.
there are a few problems here.
first, you have to be very
resourceful and smart to find gainful employment. the silly few hour exam is a significant barrier to entry to many. in the grand scheme of things, a 160 is pretty hard to come by.
second, aside from the top 10 or so schools, where liberal arts majors have a chance at great jobs, the situation is bleak. i know quite a few folks who began their "careers" working retail or temp jobs after college. the engineering/biz/IT majors usually can get a decent job even from a no-name school.
third, aside from a select few fields (engineering, accounting, etc), the world is about who you know , not what you know. this totally screws those who bought into the "follow your dreams" idea and went to a midling private or state school because chances are they have no nepotistic connections.
OK, so maybe mediocre minds are better off studying engineering or accounting.
It is consistent with even your arguments, however, that people should study liberal arts if they either 1) are very bright, that is, capable of scoring above a 160 without too much effort, 2) go to a top ten school from which they can get a good job even with a frivolous degree, 3) have wealthy parents who don't mind spending money for the betterment of their children, or 4) are interested in educational intangibles regardless of their naked economic value.
I think you may agree with me that truly bright and talented people should do whatever they want. That may be engineering for some people. But most of the smartest people I know have zero interest in becoming engineers. In fact, many of the best schools in the country, such as Harvard, don't even have engineering undergraduate programs. And these board seems to be full of people with more than enough mental ability to complete engineering majors who decided instead that they were interested in history, or poetry, or whatever.
Also, many of the smartest people coming from the top law schools will not pursue high paying firm jobs; instead, they will work for the public interest. This may seem stupid to people that only know how to take derivatives. But such are the decisions of people who are potentially much smarter than you number crunchers: yes, even in math.