Top Law Schools

Has studying for the LSAT (and improving your score) made you are a better writer and thinker?

Can you now better identify flaws in reasoning and thinking?

Bad writing often reflects flawed thinking/reasoning. Hence, do you think that you are now a better writer?

Please be honest but fair.

Yeah, but idk to what degree. For example, when I go through my newsfeed on FB and read statuses about gun control or 12/21/2012, I'm able to see hidden assumptions and flaws in reasoning a lot better than I have in the past. Perhaps I always had it in me and now it just has a fancy name to it. I cant say anything about my writing ability though, found no evidence of improvement or decline.

Studying for the LSAT has thought to be more cautious when making arguments and use more qualifiers and adjectives to be more precise. I feel like now I can discern more quickly between people that make good arguments vs the people that don't.

Typhoon24 wrote:Yeah, but idk to what degree. For example, when I go through my newsfeed on FB and read statuses about gun control or 12/21/2012, I'm able to see hidden assumptions and flaws in reasoning a lot better than I have in the past. Perhaps I always had it in me and now it just has a fancy name to it. I cant say anything about my writing ability though, found no evidence of improvement or decline.

I have also seen a lot of flawed arguments about gun control.

Well it certainly does build stronger and more numerous neural connections that strengthen your reasoning ability. A study has been posted about it here sometime in the last few months if you'd like to search for it.

If it were really making students better at finding flaws in reasoning, they'd be avoiding law school like the plague.

Oh, wait

I'd say it's definitely improved my reasoning ability in life. It has helped me point out flaws in my own and other people's logic with a lot less effort since I've now been trained to notice them immediately. I'd say it's made me a better writer simply because it's made me a better thinker. You didn't mention it, but it's also made me a better reader as well (catching slight attitudinal tones that tip the author's hand, pattern recognition, etc.). Also, besides thinking ability, the LSAT requires a lot of work to score in the top ranges, so it's helped improve my work ethic when it comes to studying as well. I mostly went through undergrad just using my natural ability. Without exaggerating, overall I'm a much better thinker as a result of studying for the LSAT. However, I was not really exposed to formal or informal logic in undergrad.

I pretty much turn every argument I encounter into an LSAT question:

What (person) just said is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it:

And invariably I come up with something similar to something I've seen on an LSAT question.

willwash wrote:I pretty much turn every argument I encounter into an LSAT question:

What (person) just said is vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it:

And invariably I come up with something similar to something I've seen on an LSAT question.

I had to stare at this for a while to decide whether you were saying it out loud. Not helping neural connections in me yet.

It's improving my thinking skills to a greater degree. I am always pointing out the flaws in reasoning in everyday conversation.

My close friends and family hated me while I studied for the LSAT because I would just constantly point out leaps in logic, flawed logic, assumptions, etc and it drove them crazy.

Blueprint is scientifically proven to make you smarter: http://www.dailycal.org/2012/08/23/stud ... nge-brain/

bp shinners wrote:Blueprint is scientifically proven to make you smarter: http://www.dailycal.org/2012/08/23/stud ... nge-brain/

Cause is unprovable - learned that from LSAT prep.

My gf is still annoyed with me because of it. I think it makes it easier to sound like a douche more than anything. Not my fault she's wrong most of the time.

Please be honest everyone.

If you don't believe that you're better thinker now than you were before, please feel free to say so (but explain why). What I like about the Internet is that you don't have to be as PC as you have to be in real life.

vtoodler wrote:Please be honest everyone.

If you don't believe that you're better thinker now than you were before, please feel free to say so (but explain why). What I like about the Internet is that you don't have to be as PC as you have to be in real life.

It's not that I'm not reasoning better, but that no one else gives a shit about an LSAT or wants to hear about how they could strengthen an argument.

The LSAT is basically where you learn everything you were supposed to learn in undergrad--reading, critical thinking, etc.

kaseyb002 wrote:

bp shinners wrote:Blueprint is scientifically proven to make you smarter: http://www.dailycal.org/2012/08/23/stud ... nge-brain/

Cause is unprovable - learned that from LSAT prep.

Studying for the LSAT possibly taught you, it's very difficult to prove something with absolute certainty.

Another thing...

In real life, some people say something caused something when they really meant something contributed a lot to something. This is possibly one reason why in real life one has to be careful when analyzing someone else's argument. The context or the understanding of the person's background might provide you with some correct assumptions that on the LSAT would have been otherwise totally unwarranted.

kaseyb002 wrote:

bp shinners wrote:Blueprint is scientifically proven to make you smarter: http://www.dailycal.org/2012/08/23/stud ... nge-brain/

Cause is unprovable - learned that from LSAT prep.

Unprovable? You must have missed the lesson on absolute logical force.

Not really. It did improve my ability to read dense passages quickly, which is what the LSAT is mostly about IMO. I never thought many of the questions in a given LSAT were logically or analytically challenging, but I did find comprehending every passage fully in the time allotted was a challenge. Prepping for the test by working on this skill (not surprisingly) improved my ability to comprehend dense passages under a time constraint.

vtoodler wrote:Has studying for the LSAT (and improving your score) made you are a better writer and thinker?

No.

hume85 wrote:Not really. It did improve my ability to read dense passages quickly, which is what the LSAT is mostly about IMO. I never thought many of the questions in a given LSAT were logically or analytically challenging, but I did find comprehending every passage fully in the time allotted was a challenge. Prepping for the test by working on this skill (not surprisingly) improved my ability to comprehend dense passages under a time constraint.

If I was given 40 minutes instead of 35 for each section I would have scored 175+ every time.

OP,

You may want to check out Norman Doige's relatively new book, The Brain That Changes Itself (2012):
http://www.amazon.com/Brain-That-Change ... 0143113100
ETA: Correction - apparently it's not a new book if Amazon's data is correct, but the copy that I came aross may have been a 2012 edition.

It's currently in the featured section of books at Barnes and Noble (on those tables in the center aisles) and I seemed to recall (not 100% sure, but I think this is the case) that there were some articles online as well discussing students who had changed their brain wiring from studying for the LSAT. I don't think it was so much improvements (again, if I remember correctly) in writing, but rather in their logical thinking (and the areas of the brain associated with that). One would think that that would be expected, but I believe the difference was that previous research had not identified a direct physiological change in the brain from this type of studying, whereas now it seems that the science has proven it to be the case.

I actually just picked up Doige's book and haven't had a chance to read it yet, but it definitely sounds intriguing.

I don't know if studying the LSAT has made me any smarter or improved my thinking skills, but I now hear Spock in my head. "That is highly illogical." Damn it, the voices won't stop!

Yes, I think so.
Honestly, the knowledge gained from studying LG has NOT IMO helped me get smarter in real life. (because the stimulus and the game scenario set up and the numerous restrictions and deductions that the rules constrain do not reflect real life situations..)
However, the knowledge gained from studying LR has definitely helped me improve my thinking skills primarily because I am better equipped at spotting flaws, assumptions, and conclusions in opinions/ everyday conversations/ arguments/ articles, etc.
Plus, while studying for the LSAT, I have broadened my vocabulary knowledge.

Unfortunately, despite the benefits I am still not a big fan of LSAT. HA!