luthersloan wrote:Law school grades are relevant mostly for the reason that LSAT scores and undergraduate grades are relevant. All three measure, in some highly imperfect way, intelligence and work ethic. With, in the case of law school grades, a tiny bit of relevence to the actual skills and abilities useful to the practice of law.
That's the huge red flag undermining any assertion that grades/LSAT scores may act as reasonable predictors of someone's innate intelligence and work ethic. The LSAT doesn't measure intelligence; it measure speed of processing. Synaptic efficiency indeed lays the foundation for higher-level brain functions, but there isn't a 1:1 relationship between "processing speed" and "intelligence."
Work ethic is another beast altogether. Does the ultra genius who opens his textbook for the first time the day before the exam and books the class (after spending the entire semester smoking weed and playing Skyrim) have a good work ethic? Probably not...but his efficient use of time makes up for that in the context of the exam.
Intelligence is too complicated to warrant a standardized approach to its measurement. Don't mistake that as attacking their approach on "everyone's a unique snowflake" grounds, though...that bullshit is rampant on TLS. If you're among the small crowd affected by these type 2 errors, the barriers preventing you from achieving your goals may seem impossible to get around...so suck it up and either find a way or make one.