well, I wasn't referring to engineer majors in law school, but, yea...

Bro

What is this bullshit that a 175 wouldn't crack the top 30?

Blame USNews.

Look, I've pondered this same thing and it's definitely unfair. But I think your perspective is a bit short-sighted. I'm of the belief that in the long term, everything equals out.

Additionally, someone with a hard science degree / engineering can get a different, successful career unrelated to law. They've proven themselves in that area. Seems fair to me. Dunno why you'd break your back studying O/P chem for 4 years just to go to law school, lol

Patent law?

Patent law is for engineering washouts. Who for some reason get paid twice as much as real engineers. It's a pretty retarded system.

Engineering blows hard. I happily turned down engineering jobs to go to law school. I can confidently say that at least 60 of engineers do not like engineering, at least chemical engineering

Yale Law School associate dean apparently said, "... At the same time, a 4.0 with a very easy course load, or with courses that don’t really demonstrate a potential to succeed in the kind of work you’ll do in law school (like fine arts, or all science/engineering courses) may not help your application."

http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/admission ... questions/

Let's try to stay on topic in this thread.

They're doing a good job staying on topic so far...

"may not help" really solid way of saying nothing.

Yale Law School associate dean apparently said, "... At the same time, a 4.0 with a very easy course load, or with courses that don’t really demonstrate a potential to succeed in the kind of work you’ll do in law school (like fine arts, or all science/engineering courses) may not help your application."

http://blogs.law.stanford.edu/admission ... questions/

I’ve re-read Asha’s comment that you mention and I’m going to interpret her remarks by focusing on her use of the word “all” when talking about science and engineering. I personally believe that science /engineering backgrounds are valuable and most certainly are not viewed here at SLS as a weakness. That said, though, not all science/engineering applicants come to the table with their best foot forward. For example, I don’t like to see an engineering major’s transcript with only (or all – here’s my connection to Asha’s comment) science-type courses. I want to see you branch out of your safe and secure science world and take a walk on the wild side and enter the humanities world, for example. Now, I know the engineering major does not leave a whole lot of room for exploring, but there is room and you should most definitely take advantage of that to round out your academic program of study. Likewise, I like to see the English major take a walk on the wild side as well so this advice does not only apply to the science kids.

I want you to think about this scenario for a minute.

You have a chemical engineering major who is at the top of his major with a 2.7 GPA. Getting a C+ in a class is hard. He took Calc 5, Physics 3, Econometric's, ect.

You have a Communication major who has a 3.7 GPA. If you don't get a B+ in a class you're mentally retarded. He took Communications 101, Interpersonal Communication.

The communication major scores a 165, the engineering major scores a 175. The communication major gets into Cornell. The engineering major would be lucky to break >30.

Explain to me how this makes sense? I would like to hear some non liberal arts majors too.