Top Law Schools

.

MagnumLifeStyle wrote:I've been searching this forum and have seen several recommendations. I've seen many recommend the Economist, but I think the level of difficulty of its prose is comparatively easier than that of the passages that appear in the RC section.

Could you please recommend any book (hopefully interesting) that you've read that makes the RC passages look very easy?

I struggled with RC at first. Instead of reading other things to prepare you for it, why not use the real things. Get every preptest and read/do all the RC passages. And you can get other prepbooks filled with RC passages.

This is what I did, and it worked out

Econ books. Lots of logic, clear reasoning. Perfect for the LSAT.

.

If you say so

I recently read Steven Pinker's The Blank Slate and found him to make several complex, yet cogent, arguments that functioned similarly to extended LR and RC passages. The Freakonomics books also work well for this purpose. Many positions are presented and analyzed in Pinker's work as well as in the Freakonomics books.

.

Heidegger. Being and Time.

Tons of books increase reading comprehension. There are many books in popular science that are helpful here. But try to avoid the oversimplified mushy-minded stuff (e.g. gladwell, dubner and levitt--freakonomics guys). Go with more substantive stuff. There is tons of great stuff on evolution and linguistics (and of course physics).

Also, keep in mind that there are tons of books in philosophy that help. Just make sure that it is so-called analytic philosophy--preferably written in the past 10 years or so. Lots of philosophy of mind stuff is quite good. Books in philosophy of law can be good too, but avoid some of the bs theory stuff (critical legal theory and legal realism). Read Dworkin, Hart, Fuller etc., instead. Feel free to go back in time a bit with phil of law. Just for fun, read Boonin's The Problem of Punishment. It has a crazy thesis, but is tightly argued, and will help with both RC and LR. While I don't recommend substantive prep for material for the LSAT, this stuff is does show up from time to time. Also, it will come up from time to time in law school.

let/them/eat/cake wrote:Heidegger. Being and Time.

Don't bother with this book, very little comparison with RC sections. Try reading a philosophy anthology instead, like The Nature of Consciousness

sumus romani wrote:
Also, keep in mind that there are tons of books in philosophy that help. Just make sure that it is so-called analytic philosophy--preferably written in the past 10 years or so. Lots of philosophy of mind stuff is quite good.

This

The Economist tends to be a favorite for dry, analytical writing

JessicaTiger wrote:The Economist tends to be a favorite for dry, analytical writing

I read the Economist quite a bit, and I think it is quite good, but not necessarily best for increasing reading comprehension. It is dry and analytical (and reasonably fast-paced, given the amount of info in any article), but its articles have a lot of "on the one hand. . . on the other hand" stuff without a lot of resolution. Some articles in the Economist do make a case for a thesis, don't get me wrong, but their theses tend to be very understated. The RC passages are more explicit and straightforward in their arguments--much more suitable for study and prep is good analytic philosophy and analytic law or ethics.

djjf39 wrote:

let/them/eat/cake wrote:Heidegger. Being and Time.

Don't bother with this book, very little comparison with RC sections. Try reading a philosophy anthology instead, like The Nature of Consciousness

I take it you mean The Nature of Consciousness edited by Block. That is a great compilation. But it runs used for $20 at Amazon. There are cheaper books available. Also, of the phil of mind stuff, the consciousness stuff is the hardest to grasp, and therefore not necessarily the best to start with. Some parts of it have been taken over by zombies (you just have to look into it further ). A good survey from, say 15 years ago could cost the OP just $5, and include mind-body stuff. For example, The Nature of Mind by Rosenthal is excellent. To be sure, the OP will not be up on the best recent work in phil of mind, but the point is to increase reading comprehension.

Reading anything by Kant can be one of the most laborious experiences a reader can have. All the jargon and contextual word usage can drive a person crazy.

vandalvideo wrote:Reading anything by Kant can be one of the most laborious experiences a reader can have. All the jargon and contextual word usage can drive a person crazy.

I have felt that pain for weeks at a time . I wouldn't recommend Kant to anyone trying to increase reading comprehension.

--ImageRemoved--

After struggling to pick up the English language, merely mastering the LSAT RC passages should be a piece of cake. ^_^




But more seriously, what about Supreme Court opinions and Law Review articles? Long and argument-intensive, these papers would serve double-duty as a taste of law school. Law review articles can be queried from JSTOR and court opinions downloaded from http://www.supremecourt.gov/.

As nice facsimiles to LSAT-like compositions-- I second The Economist. Learn about the world and tackle dense, manageable passages in the span of a lunch break.

MagnumLifeStyle wrote:I've been searching this forum and have seen several recommendations. I've seen many recommend the Economist, but I think the level of difficulty of its prose is comparatively easier than that of the passages that appear in the RC section.

Could you please recommend any book (hopefully interesting) that you've read that makes the RC passages look very easy?

Read Shakespeare plays, The Greek tragedies, the Scientific American, the Wall Street Journal, and Sun Tsu - The Art of War. Those ought to do it. (sun Tsu is not difficult, but it will keep you motivated).

As you read the shakespeare plays, practice dissecting what the sentences mean as you go along, and then try to glean the meaning of entire paragraphs and scenes.

Example from "Two Gentlemen of Verona"

Launce: When a man's servant shall play the
cur with him, look you, it goes hard; one that
I brought up of a puppy; one that I saved from
drowning, when three or four of his blind bro-
thers and sisters went to it. I have taught him,
even as one would say precisely,' Thus would I
teach a dog.' I was sent to deliver him as a
present to Mistress Silvia from my master, and
I came no sooner into the dining-chamber but
he steps me to her trencher and steals her
capon's leg. O! 'tis a foul thing when a cur
cannot keep himself in all companies. I would
have, as one should say, one that takes upon
him to be a dog indeed, to be, as it were, a dog
at all things. If I had not had more wit than
he, to take a fault upon me that he did, I think
verily he had been hanged for't: sure as I live,
he had suffered for't: you shall judge. He thrusts
me himself into the company of three or four
gentleman-like dogs under the duke's table: he
had not been there—bless the mark—a pissing-
while, but all the chamber smelt him. 'Out with
the dog!' says one; 'What cur is that?' says
another; 'Whip him out,' says the third; 'Hang
him up,' says the duke. I, having been acquainted
with the smell before, knew it was Crab, and
goes me to the fellow that whips the dogs:
'Friend,' quoth I, 'you mean to whip the dog?'
'Ay, marry, do I,' quoth he. 'You do him the
more wrong,' quoth I; ' 'twas I did the thing you
wot of.' He makes me no more ado, but whips
me out of the chamber. How many masters
would do this for his servant? Nay, I'll be
sworn, I have sat in the stocks for puddings he
hath stolen, otherwise he had been executed;
I have stood on the pillory for geese he hath
killed, otherwise he had suffered for't; thou
thinkest not of this now. Nay, I remember the
trick you served me when I took my leave of
Madam Silvia: did not I bid thee still mark me
and do as I do? When didst thou see me heave
up my leg and make water against a gentle-
woman's farthingale? Didst thou ever see me
do such a trick?

What is this about?

Three guineas by Virginia Woolf

On the Genealogy of Morality by Nietzsche

In fact, any works by these writers.

HiLine wrote:Three guineas by Virginia Woolf

On the Genealogy of Morality by Nietzsche

In fact, any works by these writers.

Nietzsche's Genealogy won't help at all. All it will do is piss you off.

Read Faust. It will take you 10 times to understand it, but once you do, oh, is it beautiful.

I've been reading a few articles a week for a year or so now from academic journals. Stuff can be really dense, and the RCs typically come from there (from what I understand). I've twice encountered RC's that were summarized versions of articles that I read, one was about democratization by Larry Diamond and the other was on evolution or something that I probably read in Evolution and Human Behavior. It actually kind of messed with me a bit when I did the one about democracy because I had just read the article the day before (weird coincidence), but on the whole I think journals are the way to go.

Anything that's really dense, so much so that it takes you a while to decipher it. All of the (serious) suggestions seem pretty good.

MagnumLifeStyle wrote:I've been searching this forum and have seen several recommendations. I've seen many recommend the Economist, but I think the level of difficulty of its prose is comparatively easier than that of the passages that appear in the RC section.

Could you please recommend any book (hopefully interesting) that you've read that makes the RC passages look very easy?

Reading TONS of RC passages. Read nearly every RC passage before the real LSAT. That is what makes RC look easier.

After at least 50 passages, you will see argument patterns (cause/effect, etc.) as well as argument patterns distinct to the subject (such as nuances and differences in law passages, science passages, history passages, etc.).