Top Law Schools

Patriot1208 wrote: He does talk about legal employment in the choosing a school part. While a lot of it is things we can derive as 0L's i'd venture to say you should wait to give advice till you've actually been through the process yourself and know to the extent some of those things are true. We all hear that law schools are regional, but none of us know the extent. I'm not hating, just saying I think it is a bit premature.

Can you find a place he's wrong?

Curry wrote:

Patriot1208 wrote: He does talk about legal employment in the choosing a school part. While a lot of it is things we can derive as 0L's i'd venture to say you should wait to give advice till you've actually been through the process yourself and know to the extent some of those things are true. We all hear that law schools are regional, but none of us know the extent. I'm not hating, just saying I think it is a bit premature.

Can you find a place he's wrong?

I agree with his line of reasoning. I don't think Patriot is saying I made a mistake, I think he is saying 2 main things. Firstly that I could be wrong because what I am saying is mainly hearsay and intuition, and secondly that I am not speaking from a position of authority and thus hurts the ability to get my message across.

bk187 wrote:

Curry wrote:

Patriot1208 wrote: He does talk about legal employment in the choosing a school part. While a lot of it is things we can derive as 0L's i'd venture to say you should wait to give advice till you've actually been through the process yourself and know to the extent some of those things are true. We all hear that law schools are regional, but none of us know the extent. I'm not hating, just saying I think it is a bit premature.

Can you find a place he's wrong?

I agree with his line of reasoning. I don't think Patriot is saying I made a mistake, I think he is saying 2 main things. Firstly that I could be wrong because what I am saying is mainly hearsay and intuition, and secondly that I am not speaking from a position of authority and thus hurts the ability to get my message across.

Thats fair, but given the nature of the post itself, and an inability to point out anything significantly wrong with what you said, I don't think the prematurity has any real impact. For the people that this is going to affect, you being an 0L makes no difference.

Curry wrote:

bk187 wrote:

Curry wrote:

Patriot1208 wrote: He does talk about legal employment in the choosing a school part. While a lot of it is things we can derive as 0L's i'd venture to say you should wait to give advice till you've actually been through the process yourself and know to the extent some of those things are true. We all hear that law schools are regional, but none of us know the extent. I'm not hating, just saying I think it is a bit premature.

Can you find a place he's wrong?

I agree with his line of reasoning. I don't think Patriot is saying I made a mistake, I think he is saying 2 main things. Firstly that I could be wrong because what I am saying is mainly hearsay and intuition, and secondly that I am not speaking from a position of authority and thus hurts the ability to get my message across.

Thats fair, but given the nature of the post itself, and an inability to point out anything significantly wrong with what you said, I don't think the prematurity has any real impact. For the people that this is going to affect, you being an 0L makes no difference.

I'm not necessarily saying he is wrong, just that the reasoning is a little shallow coming form an 0L. Again, no need to get defensive, and I appreciate the efforts. I just think it would hold a little more weight with specificity from someone who has been through the process.

Patriot1208 wrote: I'm not necessarily saying he is wrong, just that the reasoning is a little shallow coming form an 0L. Again, no need to get defensive, and I appreciate the efforts. I just think it would hold a little more weight with specificity from someone who has been through the process.

Fair enough.

This is such an awesome 10k, BK The only way it could've been better is (as Dany said) if there was some Bkitty in it.

Patriot1208 wrote:

aliarrow wrote:

bk187 wrote:Thanks to the support and the people who found typos.

Patriot1208 wrote:This seems a little.... premature.

Just a tad. I'm honestly only kind of okay about the whole thing considering it does some major glossing over of relevant parts (that midlaw isn't entirely mythical, 25 year IBR, URM stuff, etc) and I feel annoyed at me writing it as a 0L myself. However considering that the same 3 or so replies (keep your debt reasonable in regards to job prospects, retake/reapply, don't assume you will do well) and the same has been said by many law students, I felt like explaining the reasons why those replies are constantly given to 0L's who say "should I pay sticker at school X," "I am planning on transferring," "should I go to school Y for biglaw," etc.

Not to white knight or anything but...
When it comes to the factors Bk discusses, I don't think these are things a 1L+ would know any more about than a 0L near the end of the cycle. Legal employment, transferring, law school exams, legal writing, etc are all different stories, but I don't see what info 1Ls would have access to that makes them more qualified on choosing a school or law school admissions.

He does talk about legal employment in the choosing a school part. While a lot of it is things we can derive as 0L's i'd venture to say you should wait to give advice till you've actually been through the process yourself and know to the extent some of those things are true. We all hear that law schools are regional, but none of us know the extent. I'm not hating, just saying I think it is a bit premature.

+1. This should be regarded as the de facto conventional wisdom of TLS. It's even more pertinent because this comes from a 0L.

kapital98 wrote:This should be regarded as the de facto conventional wisdom of TLS.

This.
Sure it could be more specific and in depth if it came from a graduate, but unless a recent graduate would take issue with any of this information, it's perfect for what it is.

Patriot1208 wrote:I'm not necessarily saying he is wrong, just that the reasoning is a little shallow coming form an 0L. Again, no need to get defensive, and I appreciate the efforts. I just think it would hold a little more weight with specificity from someone who has been through the process.

This is exactly the type of ad hominem argument that can get you into trouble.

The truth is that the statistics regarding the student debt problem in our country are disturbing and the general population doesn't understand the dangers of debt or their own feelings of generational entitlement. I forgot though, statistics only apply to other people, not to you or the readers of this thread.

zonto wrote:

Patriot1208 wrote:I'm not necessarily saying he is wrong, just that the reasoning is a little shallow coming form an 0L. Again, no need to get defensive, and I appreciate the efforts. I just think it would hold a little more weight with specificity from someone who has been through the process.

This is exactly the type of ad hominem argument that can get you into trouble.

The truth is that the statistics regarding the student debt problem in our country are disturbing and the general population doesn't understand the dangers of debt or their own feelings of generational entitlement. I forgot though, statistics only apply to other people, not to you or the readers of this thread.

Wut?

Ad hominem - not sure this means what.you think it means. And if it does, you grossly misused it.

And statistics regarding debt problem? Wut? Have you even read what I have posted? This is probably the derpeist post i've ever read. It's like you imagined a post that doesn't exist.

I like this.... there is a lot of BS on this web site and I thought this was balanced....

I would also suggest interning at a law firm before going to school...it lets you see the real day to day aspects of the legal field...especially if going to a lower ranked school...

Dear OP
Well you certainly have the pontificating part of being a lawyer down. 0L is 0L, so your "advice" is a little suspect, no? Why don't you figure out your own life and let others figure out their own?

Patriot1208 wrote: I'm not necessarily saying he is wrong, just that the reasoning is a little shallow coming form an 0L. Again, no need to get defensive, and I appreciate the efforts. I just think it would hold a little more weight with specificity from someone who has been through the process.

I understand your point, and if it is the credibility issue (hearsay, etc. as a 0L), then I agree. I think bk's advice is solid (i skimmed the headers and conclusion ), but I see where you're coming from...except maybe the whole "if he's been through it maybe he'd know better about things like how law schools are regional, etc." Even if a person has gone through it, wouldn't it still be anecdotal/hearsay at best? I mean, linking stats would be a step in the right direction (if you ignore the question of self-selection of stat validity), but a 0L can do that too.

Buuuut yeah, on the credibility issue, once again, I do see what you mean. gj on the post though bk, i hope 0Ls read it.

While I agree with Patriot that as 0Ls, we are not necessarily in a position to speak with too much authority about some of this stuff, I thought OP was actually a pretty restrained summation of the general TLS wisdom. That "wisdom" itself is at times suspect as it is often founded on hearsay, groupthink, and conjecture, but BK's post actually limited itself mostly to stuff that is either objectively verifiable to one degree or another, or could reasonably be believed to be true.

Also, as a 0L who hasn't committed to a school, BK's advice is probably less biased that most of what I see current students posting on here, which is frequently blatantly biased towards whatever school that person goes to.

roary wrote:Dear OP
Well you certainly have the pontificating part of being a lawyer down. 0L is 0L, so your "advice" is a little suspect, no? Why don't you figure out your own life and let others figure out their own?

I don't get this. The OP was fairly good natured and well intentioned, and not grossly untrue. What's your beef?

DoubleChecks wrote:

Patriot1208 wrote: I'm not necessarily saying he is wrong, just that the reasoning is a little shallow coming form an 0L. Again, no need to get defensive, and I appreciate the efforts. I just think it would hold a little more weight with specificity from someone who has been through the process.

I understand your point, and if it is the credibility issue (hearsay, etc. as a 0L), then I agree. I think bk's advice is solid (i skimmed the headers and conclusion ), but I see where you're coming from...except maybe the whole "if he's been through it maybe he'd know better about things like how law schools are regional, etc." Even if a person has gone through it, wouldn't it still be anecdotal/hearsay at best? I mean, linking stats would be a step in the right direction (if you ignore the question of self-selection of stat validity), but a 0L can do that too.

Buuuut yeah, on the credibility issue, once again, I do see what you mean. gj on the post though bk, i hope 0Ls read it.

I agree with most of his post. I just certainly think a better understanding of the process is gained by actually going through it and seeing some it happen first hand. I mean, there is still a credibility issue because it becomes anecdote v tls axiom. I think it is a good post, just something that could be improved upon, and probably should be held off till you have that experience yourself.

roary wrote:Dear OP
Well you certainly have the pontificating part of being a lawyer down. 0L is 0L, so your "advice" is a little suspect, no? Why don't you figure out your own life and let others figure out their own?

The advice is actually pretty good. Obviously, as in all things law related, there is more nuance to all of this than bk has added here. But for a clueless 0L who is about to take a plunge into a major life commitment, this is fantastic advice. I wish more 0Ls understood this general picture of law school as well as bk does.

Patriot1208 wrote:

zonto wrote:

Patriot1208 wrote:I'm not necessarily saying he is wrong, just that the reasoning is a little shallow coming form an 0L. Again, no need to get defensive, and I appreciate the efforts. I just think it would hold a little more weight with specificity from someone who has been through the process.

This is exactly the type of ad hominem argument that can get you into trouble.

The truth is that the statistics regarding the student debt problem in our country are disturbing and the general population doesn't understand the dangers of debt or their own feelings of generational entitlement. I forgot though, statistics only apply to other people, not to you or the readers of this thread.

Wut?

Ad hominem - not sure this means what.you think it means. And if it does, you grossly misused it.

And statistics regarding debt problem? Wut? Have you even read what I have posted? This is probably the derpeist post i've ever read. It's like you imagined a post that doesn't exist.

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.

The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made). linky

-----

The statistics statement wasn't directed at a post you made. It was directed at you and the other readers of this thread and forum that may not understand the magnitude of the debt they talk about incurring. No hard feelings, nor was I insulting you. Just wanted to clear up that just because someone is a 0L doesn't mean their advice about law school shouldn't hold the same weight as someone saying the same thing that is in law school.

So, now that you wrote out that whole post, re read my posts, then hopefully you'll realize how you misused it.

You also apparently don't understand what you've read because I don't see anyone not understanding debt.

If anything patriot was pointing out an Appeal to Authority fallacy

dr123 wrote:If anything patriot was pointing out an Appeal to Authority fallacy

Oh... LSAT logic, how you do help us in life.

I actually think Zonto is right. If OP is an 0L, and can't possible have garnered his advice from "first-hand experience," then where did he come up with a bunch of sentiments that largely seem to fall in line with the majority of law students on TLS? Maybe that's why he called it a compendium: he's just piecing together stuff that he's seen hashed out ad nauseum in this forum by law students.

So, absurdly, Patriot was committing an ad hominem on a vehicle of general sentiment.

Judges' ruling:

--ImageRemoved--

While this thread might lack authority coming from a 0L, it's solid advice. For people who are new the TLS it will be informative. People who have been around TLS should know most of the information in this thread already though.

Patriot1208 wrote:So, now that you wrote out that whole post, re read my posts, then hopefully you'll realize how you misused it.

You also apparently don't understand what you've read because I don't see anyone not understanding debt.

Quote from OP:

"Law school is not a shelter from the economy. Well, I guess it is in a certain sense since you are delaying having to find a job, but it is an expensive shelter than can cost upwards of $70,000 per year. Most law schools cost well into the hundreds of thousands of dollars and the job prospects in the legal field aren’t any better than the rest of the economy. The current unemployment rate for recent college grads is around 20% and it is about the same recent law school grads. So you shouldn’t go into law school thinking that your employment prospects will magically be better on the other side and that you can wait out a bad economy in law school because it simply isn’t true."

Seems to me like he's in direct opposition to the idea people have that it's fine to take on absurd amounts of debt because they are lured in by the prospect of high salaries. It also seems like you haven't been paying attention to the other threads he's referencing.

Seems like the key is to have reasonable expectations

NiccoloA wrote:Seems like the key is to have reasonable expectations

for most people, that is much easier said than done