LSAT/GPA ratio Forum

[JoeFish]

I think about 30% of law students are genuinely nice, 30% are genuinely mean, and 40% are usually nice/pretend to be nice but will immediately take to any outlet they can (usually alcohol, but sometimes anonymous internet forums) to vent their stress because they know being outright mean to people in person isn't a good business move.

I mean, I think that's an exaggeration, the ratios are more like 60/15/25 or something, but still. Note also that I never claimed the nice/mean law students don't also consume enormous amounts of alcohol.

[JamMasterJ]

As a philosophy major shouldn't you have the logical base to allow you to perform well on the LSAT?

Why is GPA any better of a measure? Because you should damn all of the talented and intelligent people who had bad semesters in college?

Did you honestly just refer to the LSAT as "evil and tyranny?" How is that any worse than judging people on 3-4 years of their life that are completely set and unchangeable? Not to mention that if you take the LSAT away, there really would be incentive for people to just go to worse schools to be a big fish in a small pond.

I suck at standardized tests. I never took the SAT or the ACT and did just fine in college. Having Asperger's doesn't help. The LSAT is too rigid. I think about things differently than other people do so no standardized test will really work well for me. The best way to describe it would be to say I see the world through a different paradigm than "regular" people.

151 is considered regular. Congrats. you're above regular; why do you keep saying this is unfair?

[lexdiamonds]

As a philosophy major shouldn't you have the logical base to allow you to perform well on the LSAT?

Why is GPA any better of a measure? Because you should damn all of the talented and intelligent people who had bad semesters in college?

Did you honestly just refer to the LSAT as "evil and tyranny?" How is that any worse than judging people on 3-4 years of their life that are completely set and unchangeable? Not to mention that if you take the LSAT away, there really would be incentive for people to just go to worse schools to be a big fish in a small pond.

I suck at standardized tests. I never took the SAT or the ACT and did just fine in college. Having Asperger's doesn't help. The LSAT is too rigid. I think about things differently than other people do so no standardized test will really work well for me. The best way to describe it would be to say I see the world through a different paradigm than "regular" people.

151 is considered regular. Congrats. you're above regular; why do you keep saying this is unfair?

Because he has a 4.0 in Philosophy and thinks that because he only got a 155, it must be that he's a bad test taker rather than that he's overestimated his own talents.


The LSAT matters because it's the only objective way to rank people's aptitude for logical reasoning and reading comprehension. My undergrad major was in the hard sciences and just going off of GPA would be unfair because science and engineering students generally have the lowest GPA's, because we have to understand material which involves immensely complex theories and concepts that most people can't understand. Even if you're a poor test taker, those are skills which are essential for the practise of law and if you haven't got them then maybe law isn't for you.

[Mal Reynolds]

The LSAT matters because it's the only objective way to rank people's aptitude for logical reasoning and reading comprehension.

Well it's not the ONLY way but the LSAT is definitely the best way to rank candidates on these skills. The reason I point this out is not to be a smarty pants but because I want a Philosopher King response to my claim. My breath is bated as fuck right now. Come on PK! I just said the LSAT was the best at something!

[hoos89]

/

[Mal Reynolds]

As much as I hate to be the bearer of bad news, he's been banned.

Say it isn't so. Commence my search for the PK controversy.