Should I retake with a 175? :/ Forum

[stargazin]

Probably more toward the average.

[Ragged]

At full risk of sounding like an Ivy tool, I'd say that's probably because of your undergraduate institution. As another example, "business" is a joke major at many schools; you'd be a dolt to argue the same of UPenn Wharton. My job prospects are fine (by which I mean I have a job lined up) and so are those of my classmates in economics -- most of them are ending up in finance (100k-120k), consulting (85k), & econ research (40k-60k) positions out of UG. This -- and not arrogance or desperate attachment to prestige -- is why I'm limiting myself to top law schools. Okay, formally recusing myself from further discussion of this because I don't want to derail my own thread.

You can recluse yourself all you want. I know a bullshit major when I see one. Harvard or not.

[Shooter]

At full risk of sounding like an Ivy tool, I'd say that's probably because of your undergraduate institution. As another example, "business" is a joke major at many schools; you'd be a dolt to argue the same of UPenn Wharton. My job prospects are fine (by which I mean I have a job lined up) and so are those of my classmates in economics -- most of them are ending up in finance (100k-120k), consulting (85k), & econ research (40k-60k) positions out of UG. This -- and not arrogance or desperate attachment to prestige -- is why I'm limiting myself to top law schools. Okay, formally recusing myself from further discussion of this because I don't want to derail my own thread.

You can recluse yourself all you want. I know a bullshit major when I see one. Harvard or not.

I dunno about this. Business majors at my undergraduate university needed to take a lot of finance, statistics and accounting courses. It probably wasn't the most rigorous curriculum of all time, but it definitely was not bullshit.

(FWIW, I was not a business major)

[DoubleChecks]

At full risk of sounding like an Ivy tool, I'd say that's probably because of your undergraduate institution. As another example, "business" is a joke major at many schools; you'd be a dolt to argue the same of UPenn Wharton. My job prospects are fine (by which I mean I have a job lined up) and so are those of my classmates in economics -- most of them are ending up in finance (100k-120k), consulting (85k), & econ research (40k-60k) positions out of UG. This -- and not arrogance or desperate attachment to prestige -- is why I'm limiting myself to top law schools. Okay, formally recusing myself from further discussion of this because I don't want to derail my own thread.

You can recluse yourself all you want. I know a bullshit major when I see one. Harvard or not.

how's she being a recluse by believing her major is not necessarily a bullshit one (ignoring how you just turned a noun into a verb lol)? or are you making the clever argument that she's hiding herself from reality?

[JazzOne]

Recluse is also a verb. I interpreted it as sarcasm.

[notanumber]

Recluse is also a verb. I interpreted it as sarcasm.

Awkward word choice and sentence construction in a screed denouncing social science majors? I interpreted it as unintentional irony.

Not that any of it matters. OP's "bullshit" major positions the OP for the job market or for law school admissions better than any major from my Alma Mater, giving the OP the last laugh.

[Shooter]

Recluse is also a verb. I interpreted it as sarcasm.

Awkward word choice and sentence construction in a screed denouncing social science majors? I interpreted it as unintentional irony.

Not that any of it matters. OP's "bullshit" major positions the OP for the job market or for law school admissions better than any major from my Alma Mater, giving the OP the last laugh.

Hi, notanumber. I just got done lurking your LSN. Whoah...

[SemperLegal]

Assuming the OP is right, how could any major with a six figure starting salary be bs? I am not sure what criteria is being used, but any course of study that makes someone with zero experience and one degree worth 100k is clearly desirable and not at all bs.

Ragged, what would you consider a "real" major, and why?

[DoubleChecks]

Recluse is also a verb. I interpreted it as sarcasm.

not that it matters, and not to derail the thread...but how is recluse a verb? (honest question)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/recluse

[JazzOne]

Recluse is also a verb. I interpreted it as sarcasm.

not that it matters, and not to derail the thread...but how is recluse a verb? (honest question)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/recluse

I found it here:

http://www.definitions.net/definition/recluse

But now that I look at the url more carefully, that website is a little suspect. Let's see shat Merrian Webster says.

Edit: Nothing in Merrian Webster. My mistake.

[DoubleChecks]

Recluse is also a verb. I interpreted it as sarcasm.

not that it matters, and not to derail the thread...but how is recluse a verb? (honest question)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/recluse

I found it here:

http://www.definitions.net/definition/recluse

But now that I look at the url more carefully, that website is a little suspect. Let's see shat Merrian Webster says.

Edit: Nothing in Merrian Webster. My mistake.

Just don't go using Webster's Third New International Dictionary -- Scalia would throw a fit! lol

[lackadaisy]

Recluse is also a verb. I interpreted it as sarcasm.

not that it matters, and not to derail the thread...but how is recluse a verb? (honest question)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/recluse

I found it here:

http://www.definitions.net/definition/recluse

But now that I look at the url more carefully, that website is a little suspect. Let's see shat Merrian Webster says.

Edit: Nothing in Merrian Webster. My mistake.

Ragged just made a boo-boo, either fundamentally or accidentally confusing "recuse" (which I used earlier in the thread) and "recluse." It was some variant of a typo. Ditto with the highly amusing concept of a "billshit" major.

Nothing to see here, move along...

[albusdumbledore]

Recluse is also a verb. I interpreted it as sarcasm.

not that it matters, and not to derail the thread...but how is recluse a verb? (honest question)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/recluse

I think Ragged meant to use "recuse" not recluse, which is what the OP used and makes sense in context. Maybe it was a typo on his part, or maybe he can't read. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. I would also like more elaboration on what a "bullshit" major is. I was a CS major and a Philosophy major and I can guarantee my philosophy curriculum was at least as rigorous, if not more so, than the CS major. All encompassing generalizations like that are ridiculous.

As for the OP, I think this is the right answer:

Again, I really don't think that the advantage you would get from an additional 5 points is worth the tiny bump you would get in admissions chances. As-is you would almost certainly get into at least one of the 3 top schools.

[Ragged]

Assuming the OP is right, how could any major with a six figure starting salary be bs? I am not sure what criteria is being used, but any course of study that makes someone with zero experience and one degree worth 100k is clearly desirable and not at all bs.

Ragged, what would you consider a "real" major, and why?

I consider majors in natural sciences (including engeneering) as well as most non-general business majors non-bullshit. They have very specific application and real world value. I wouldn't say that Sociology and other social sciences lack value, but those disciplines are alot more vague and real world application is not as readily available for them as it is for more concrete subjects.

Also, I really like Economics, but majoring in it to me would only be worth if it was in a combination with finance or something.

Still, lackadaisy I didn't mean to offend you, ok. I guess it was uncalled for for me to call it bullshit like that to your face and I take that back. I was not completly sober when I wrote some of that stuff, hope you understand.

[nbafan135]

just blame it on the alcohol ragged

[Ragged]

just blame it on the ah-a-a-a-a-a- alcohol ragged

ftfm

[chiach1]

Standard TLS answer here (LinkRemoved)

Hilarious

[tomwatts]

I'll be the first to admit that I read this thread quickly, but I don't believe that anyone's brought up averaging yet. Even if your retake gets you a 180, you'll still likely be looked at as sort-of-mid-to-high-170's-ish by HYS.

While retaking might make you feel better ("Hah LSAT! I showed you!"), if you get rejected, it's not because of your LSAT score. Yale and Stanford in particular (because of their size) are very unpredictable in their admissions decisions, and they look well beyond the numbers once you hit certain thresholds (and your LSAT score is well into that range). You might get rejected because of your GPA, and you might get rejected because of your softs. Instead of retaking, work on those softs, and no one can really tell you whether you'll get into Y or S, but better softs will help.

And speaking from experience, I can agree with the above suggestions that it's much harder to move from around 175 to 180 than it is to move from 170 to 175. Everything has to go right on test day for you to get a 180 (and that involves some luck). If you retake and get a 177 or 178, I seriously doubt that it will affect your chances one bit.