kk19131 wrote:You're seriously telling me that the logic games somehow mimic real-life situations?
Are people often given sets of complex information that must be untangled in 7/8 minutes?
First off, it does not matter what purpose it serves in law school or as a lawyer. This is NOT a knowledge-based test. All that matters is its ability to help law schools identify students who will succeed or not. According to their research, it does that.
Not that it matters, but if you really want to know the ways that it could help (directly), then consider the numerous situations during a case or courtroom session or class where you are presented with several facts and must develop possible conclusions, restrictions, etc. on what happened. Consider how these situations usually don't involve hours where you get to sit around thinking about it. The games represent situations where you can identify these factors quickly and in a way that will be conducive to your learning.
Example: A professor will present several facts about a case. He'll call on you in class to make a call on that case. You don't have an hour to consider the possible outcomes, or possible reasons why something can or can't occur. You have a minute. When a witness is being questioned, you don't have an hour to analyze where the opposition is going with their questioning, or figure out why testimony may or may not fit within the context of the case. You have minutes. Life in law school and in law is at its core, being able to take principles, facts, details, etc. and develop logical outcomes, restrictions, conclusions, flaws, etc. in a shortened amount of time.
Just because YOU happen to be slower than many people in your effort to demonstrate those abilities doesn't mean the test is a bad detector of these abilities. The fact that you could not connect what appear to be meaningless games to real life situations only goes further in demonstrating that the LSAT probably didn't do that bad of a job with your score.