Top Law Schools

im just gonna take this down

thanks for the help

This is pretty interesting, but a couple things:

(1) Saying you want to remake the law in your vision sounds arrogant. I would avoid saying anything like that.

(2) You say a lot of negative stuff about your worldview in the beginning, but you never counteract that with an equally positive transformation. If you are going to talk about how you were misguided, you need to show character growth away from your misconceptions.

I think the problem is that you've organized the whole essay chronologically. Maybe you could make it more about your love of science. Talk about why you like medicine, and why you like economics. That would probably be more effective, since right now the essay kind of gives the impression that you are just drifting from one thing to the next without direction. You need something to tie together all of the elements thematically.

Otherwise, I think you have the basic stuff for what can be a great PS.

I don't know why you aren't thrilled, it sound very good to me; it conveys many varied experiences without being too over the top. The whole things sound very humbling, and I like it, personally.

thanks for the help.
just updated, not able to really incorporate everything suggested b/c I'm not that great of a writer to be able to write non-chronologically, but I think it's better now

Change the sentence construction of the sentence that begins with 'Having read'. When you edit again look for use of the passive voice, and avoid it at all costs.

I'd also eliminate 'the humanist side' when discussing law & economics. Maybe your impression will be different when you go through 1L, but law that is driven by economics seems to be much more utilitarian than humanist to me, and I suspect that is the reaction most adcomms would have as well.

OK thanks. I'm not totally sure I can change "having read" to anything else without changing the meaning though? "After reading" is perhaps closest, but speaks to a moment in time... I'm not even sure it is so passive?
It's not like I wrote "liar's poker, having been read by all econ students, showed me..."

OK, getting pretty close.
Would appreciate another read over. Ill definitely return the favor