Top Law Schools

After dealing with actual law school material, i've come to appreciate the thinking behind LR questions(flaw, nec suffic, etc), and RC in general, but i still don't see how Logic Games are relevant to Law School or being a Lawyer.

thoughts?

It measures the ability to hold a set of rules in mind and apply those rules as situations change, or demonstrate an understanding that one rule can materially affect another. It sounds an awful lot like being a lawyer to me.

Interesting Point. I guess i see legal rules in a different light then game rules.

Right.

It's for a similar reason that Google asks potential new hires in interviews "Why are manhole covers round?," and "In a country in which people only want boys, every family continues to have children until they have a boy. If they have a girl, they have another child. If they have a boy, they stop. What is the proportion of boys to girls in the country?"

dynomite wrote:Right.

It's for a similar reason that Google asks potential new hires in interviews "Why are manhole covers round?," and "In a country in which people only want boys, every family continues to have children until they have a boy. If they have a girl, they have another child. If they have a boy, they stop. What is the proportion of boys to girls in the country?"

The manhole cover is more subjective and psychological, nothing like logic games.

Oban wrote:Interesting Point. I guess i see legal rules in a different light then game rules.

Yes, but they are measuring the capacity for a certian type of thinking. In some ways games rules are easier becasue they have no nuance or ambiguous language.

still, i dont think learning all the tricks to master games is going to help me apply rules to laws.

We'll see.

Anyway, it's a moot point. Horay for tests.

Oban wrote:

dynomite wrote:Right.

It's for a similar reason that Google asks potential new hires in interviews "Why are manhole covers round?," and "In a country in which people only want boys, every family continues to have children until they have a boy. If they have a girl, they have another child. If they have a boy, they stop. What is the proportion of boys to girls in the country?"

The manhole cover is more subjective and psychological, nothing like logic games.

What?

Oban wrote:still, i dont think learning all the tricks to master games is going to help me apply rules to laws.

We'll see.

Quick Cliff's answer for you: it doesn't.

While there are curveballs that appellate courts will like to throw during oral argument, it is nothing like the nonsense one is confronted with on the LSAT. And even the curveballs shouldn't be an issue if you have properly prepped the case even when one considers that the courts seem to like asking stuff during oral argument that was not even addressed in the briefs...

Oban wrote:

dynomite wrote:Right.

It's for a similar reason that Google asks potential new hires in interviews "Why are manhole covers round?," and "In a country in which people only want boys, every family continues to have children until they have a boy. If they have a girl, they have another child. If they have a boy, they stop. What is the proportion of boys to girls in the country?"

The manhole cover is more subjective and psychological, nothing like logic games.

The manhole cover is round so that it can't ever fall into the manhole.

I don't really see the point of Logic Games. You could be incredible at dissecting arguments / reading comp .... but how making a diagram and tracking variables and all the other stupid little tricks you use to defeat logic games in ANY way measures anything is BULLSHIT!!!!! ahhhh


If not for LG i would get a 180.

Sandro777 wrote:I don't really see the point of Logic Games. You could be incredible at dissecting arguments / reading comp .... but how making a diagram and tracking variables and all the other stupid little tricks you use to defeat logic games in ANY way measures anything is BULLSHIT!!!!! ahhhh


If not for LG i would get a 180.

People always tend to overestimate their own skill set, and underestimate the importance of their weaknesses.

Logic Games are on the LSAT so that Logic Game Bibles continue to sell.

jks289 wrote:

Sandro777 wrote:I don't really see the point of Logic Games. You could be incredible at dissecting arguments / reading comp .... but how making a diagram and tracking variables and all the other stupid little tricks you use to defeat logic games in ANY way measures anything is BULLSHIT!!!!! ahhhh


If not for LG i would get a 180.

People always tend to overestimate their own skill set, and underestimate the importance of their weaknesses.

Its hard not to read everything you say in the freezing cold Betty-Draper-I've-Pretty-Much-Checked-Out-On-Life-Here's-the-kids-Don Voice.

Kobe_Teeth wrote:

jks289 wrote:

Sandro777 wrote:I don't really see the point of Logic Games. You could be incredible at dissecting arguments / reading comp .... but how making a diagram and tracking variables and all the other stupid little tricks you use to defeat logic games in ANY way measures anything is BULLSHIT!!!!! ahhhh


If not for LG i would get a 180.

People always tend to overestimate their own skill set, and underestimate the importance of their weaknesses.

Its hard not to read everything you say in the freezing cold Betty-Draper-I've-Pretty-Much-Checked-Out-On-Life-Here's-the-kids-Don Voice.

Funny. That is exactly how law school applications have made me feel. Dead inside.

Another good question could be: Why 35 minutes per section? I think it is all to keep people out of law school that could probably do well if they got in.

jarofsoup wrote:Another good question could be: Why 35 minutes per section? I think it is all to keep people out of law school that could probably do well if they got in.

Huh?

dutchstriker wrote:

jarofsoup wrote:Another good question could be: Why 35 minutes per section? I think it is all to keep people out of law school that could probably do well if they got in.

Huh?

Clearly you don't understand. The LSAC is this evil, shadowy group of evil-doers. They scheme up ways to prevent otherwise capable people from going to the law schools of their dreams because... well, because they're evil. The only thing in the world they love is their cat.

--ImageRemoved--

in case you are at a car wash with 5 to 7 other drivers and their cars all a distinct make, model and color and each driver has a different name and hair color when the power goes out and you cannot determine who got there first.

jarofsoup wrote:Another good question could be: Why 35 minutes per section? I think it is all to keep people out of law school that could probably do well if they got in.

get used to it...time constraints are part of being a law student as well. 3 hour exams, timed bar, etc. even lawyers are often faced with tight deadlines. performing well under time pressure is actually one of the most relevant aspects of the LSAT

GATORTIM wrote:in case you are at a car wash with 5 to 7 other drivers and their cars all a distinct make, model and color and each driver has a different name and hair color when the power goes out and you cannot determine who got there first.

You have no idea how much I hate you right now.

A law exam hypo is like a giant logic game where the rules are 50 pages of material u learned in the course. It tests working memory (being able to keep track of parties and relationships) and rapid rule application/inference.

Sandro777 wrote:I don't really see the point of Logic Games. You could be incredible at dissecting arguments / reading comp .... but how making a diagram and tracking variables and all the other stupid little tricks you use to defeat logic games in ANY way measures anything is BULLSHIT!!!!! ahhhh


If not for LG i would get a 180.

My sentiments exactly! How's trying to figure out what kind of pastry Mr Baker sells Mon-Sat supposed to determine my success in Law school?

GATORTIM wrote:in case you are at a car wash with 5 to 7 other drivers and their cars all a distinct make, model and color and each driver has a different name and hair color when the power goes out and you cannot determine who got there first.

I lol'd

Alot of people say LG is like math and math is the best UG major for Law. I guess the idea of taking a multitude of variables, each of which having a certain set of conditions surrounding how they fit into a whole, and fitting them into different circumstances makes sense. Too bad I dropped out of Pre Cal honors after first 1/3 of junior year high school and never touched Match again. My quantitative requirement satisfaction in UG was "Chaos Theory."

But, I think the LGs are kind of fun. Even though they are going to kill my Feb score, I understand that them being timed makes sense in order to judge ability, and I think having studied them will enhance my ability to deal with issues that require the skills they test in the future.

That being said, I think my general LSAT ability would be much higher had LG not been a factor over the last year during prep and actual tests.