Has the LSAT made you smarter? Forum

[Barack O'Drama]

However, I think the other posters are mistaking me for what I am purporting. I am not saying that the LSAT is an iq test in that it does measure intelligence - "smart" in the discussed instance is defined as quick witted intelligence, and so to say that the LSAT does not at least prepare you to think more intuitively in the capacity of a lawyer is inaccurate (i.e. corporate litigation, drafting M&A deals that typically differ from one another). Do you really think it is a coincidence that the top schools who typically produce the brightest legal minds of today also happen to have a high lsat median and the worst schools just the opposite? I don't think it is a leap in logic to assume that at least some of these people in the process (especially the ones who have made a sizeable increase in their lsat score) have gotten smarter. This isn't a rhetorical btw.

No, just no. The LSAT doesn't teach you "to think more intuitively in the capacity of a lawyer" (which in itself doesn't make sense), and it doesn't make people smarter because more high LSAT people are at schools that select for high LSATs.

Precisely. How in the world can OP make such an egregious correlation/causation error and yet claim superior intelligence and mastery over the LSAT??? It kills people for making this exact mistake.

The irony...

[freekick]

This is a viable occurrence that has progressed throughout my prep. 3 weeks out from the June LSAT and consistently PT'ing 177+, I have noticed that even everyday conversation/argumentation has changed DRASTICALLY. 6 months ago while with friends and family I would have gone along with everyday arguments/conversations, but I now find myself implicitly finding flaws in arguments, thinking in terms of what must or could be true in a situation, or otherwise thinking in constant logical reasoning terms. It is as if I have to find the correct answer to say before I say something, instead of before my prep of just going with something for the sake of it - like I'm finding the correct answer on a logical reasoning question, lol. I'm curious if anyone else has noticed this "side effect"? The LSAT really has the ability to change the way you think if you did not already think that way (or perhaps this is what becoming smart feels like lol)

IMV, the LSAT thinking isn't very different from how a reasonably smart person thinks. Studying for the LSAT structured my thought process so that I am now always aware of the numerous ways in which I can respond. Depending on the needs of a given situation, I am able to pick the appropriate response/line of thinking from the full array of options.

So certainly more efficienct and disciplined now. Smarter? Don't think so.

ITT: A bunch of people with aspergers

Don't just hit and run; pause and elaborate if you have a point. If you don't and want to simply foul-mouth, then let it be.

[MediocreAtBest]

People don't score high on the LSAT without some serious studying and preparation, and although it requires some intelligence, it's not the determining factor. I'm sure there are countless people who bang out a 160 and are smarter than 170s. So I don't think the kids at the best schools are necessarily the "smartest," but they are probably hard working. Plus getting significantly smarter in the 4-6 months it takes you to study for the LSAT is a bit of a leap.

[LesPaul1995]

People don't score high on the LSAT without some serious studying and preparation, and although it requires some intelligence, it's not the determining factor. I'm sure there are countless people who bang out a 160 and are smarter than 170s. So I don't think the kids at the best schools are necessarily the "smartest," but they are probably hard working. Plus getting significantly smarter in the 4-6 months it takes you to study for the LSAT is a bit of a leap.

Perhaps you are correct and the LSAT merely resurfaces a potentiality that was less evident or already there in the individual. However, I fail to see how this is any different than what I am already stating. Just because this occurrence may be how it permeates in 99% of people, but I still believe it has the potentiality for causation of becoming smarter, namely in the capacity of logical reasoning faculties associated with becoming a lawyer.

[Slippin' Jimmy]

People don't score high on the LSAT without some serious studying and preparation, and although it requires some intelligence, it's not the determining factor. I'm sure there are countless people who bang out a 160 and are smarter than 170s. So I don't think the kids at the best schools are necessarily the "smartest," but they are probably hard working. Plus getting significantly smarter in the 4-6 months it takes you to study for the LSAT is a bit of a leap.

Perhaps you are correct and the LSAT merely resurfaces a potentiality that was less evident or already there in the individual. However, I fail to see how this is any different than what I am already stating. Just because this occurrence may be how it permeates in 99% of people, but I still believe it has the potentiality for causation of becoming smarter, namely in the capacity of logical reasoning faculties associated with becoming a lawyer.

The way you speak makes me want to punch you in the face.

[Pozzo]

People don't score high on the LSAT without some serious studying and preparation, and although it requires some intelligence, it's not the determining factor. I'm sure there are countless people who bang out a 160 and are smarter than 170s. So I don't think the kids at the best schools are necessarily the "smartest," but they are probably hard working. Plus getting significantly smarter in the 4-6 months it takes you to study for the LSAT is a bit of a leap.

Perhaps you are correct and the LSAT merely resurfaces a potentiality that was less evident or already there in the individual. However, I fail to see how this is any different than what I am already stating. Just because this occurrence may be how it permeates in 99% of people, but I still believe it has the potentiality for causation of becoming smarter, namely in the capacity of logical reasoning faculties associated with becoming a lawyer.

I'm fairly certain that's not an actual sentence.

[Future Ex-Engineer]

People don't score high on the LSAT without some serious studying and preparation, and although it requires some intelligence, it's not the determining factor. I'm sure there are countless people who bang out a 160 and are smarter than 170s. So I don't think the kids at the best schools are necessarily the "smartest," but they are probably hard working. Plus getting significantly smarter in the 4-6 months it takes you to study for the LSAT is a bit of a leap.

Perhaps you are correct and the LSAT merely resurfaces a potentiality that was less evident or already there in the individual. However, I fail to see how this is any different than what I am already stating. Just because this occurrence may be how it permeates in 99% of people, but I still believe it has the potentiality for causation of becoming smarter, namely in the capacity of logical reasoning faculties associated with becoming a lawyer.

I'm fairly certain that's not an actual sentence.

So have we all agreed at this point that OP is either autistic or a troll?

[Slippin' Jimmy]

People don't score high on the LSAT without some serious studying and preparation, and although it requires some intelligence, it's not the determining factor. I'm sure there are countless people who bang out a 160 and are smarter than 170s. So I don't think the kids at the best schools are necessarily the "smartest," but they are probably hard working. Plus getting significantly smarter in the 4-6 months it takes you to study for the LSAT is a bit of a leap.

Perhaps you are correct and the LSAT merely resurfaces a potentiality that was less evident or already there in the individual. However, I fail to see how this is any different than what I am already stating. Just because this occurrence may be how it permeates in 99% of people, but I still believe it has the potentiality for causation of becoming smarter, namely in the capacity of logical reasoning faculties associated with becoming a lawyer.

I'm fairly certain that's not an actual sentence.

So have we all agreed at this point that OP is either autistic or a troll?

If not a troll OP Also likes to shoplift

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3#p9634163

[mjb447]

Is there a standardized test that would make you a better writer?

[sanzgo]

People don't score high on the LSAT without some serious studying and preparation, and although it requires some intelligence, it's not the determining factor. I'm sure there are countless people who bang out a 160 and are smarter than 170s. So I don't think the kids at the best schools are necessarily the "smartest," but they are probably hard working. Plus getting significantly smarter in the 4-6 months it takes you to study for the LSAT is a bit of a leap.

Perhaps you are correct and the LSAT merely resurfaces a potentiality that was less evident or already there in the individual. However, I fail to see how this is any different than what I am already stating. Just because this occurrence may be how it permeates in 99% of people, but I still believe it has the potentiality for causation of becoming smarter, namely in the capacity of logical reasoning faculties associated with becoming a lawyer.

potentiality.

even if we accept your premise, there's really no way of knowing. none of us can scientifically prove/disprove your claim. you can't objectively measure this kind of stuff like you can with math. so it really ends up being a waste of time. whatever discussion that arises from a hypothetical that cannot be resolved except by "feelings", conjectures, anecdotes, etc. is hardly going to get you closer to whatever truth you were seeking. unless you were just hoping for a circlejerk thread where we make ourselves feel good for having studied the lsat ;;

that aside, if there's anyone who can benefit from this thread, it's you. hopefully by now, this thread has helped you become aware of the insufferable way in which you think and speak. this increased self-awareness, if you put it to good use, should help you with oci and making friends in ls.

[Future Ex-Engineer]

People don't score high on the LSAT without some serious studying and preparation, and although it requires some intelligence, it's not the determining factor. I'm sure there are countless people who bang out a 160 and are smarter than 170s. So I don't think the kids at the best schools are necessarily the "smartest," but they are probably hard working. Plus getting significantly smarter in the 4-6 months it takes you to study for the LSAT is a bit of a leap.

Perhaps you are correct and the LSAT merely resurfaces a potentiality that was less evident or already there in the individual. However, I fail to see how this is any different than what I am already stating. Just because this occurrence may be how it permeates in 99% of people, but I still believe it has the potentiality for causation of becoming smarter, namely in the capacity of logical reasoning faculties associated with becoming a lawyer.

potentiality.

even if we accept your premise, there's really no way of knowing. none of us can scientifically prove/disprove your claim. you can't objectively measure this kind of stuff like you can with math. so it really ends up being a waste of time. whatever discussion that arises from a hypothetical that cannot be resolved except by "feelings", conjectures, anecdotes, etc. is hardly going to get you closer to whatever truth you were seeking. unless you were just hoping for a circlejerk thread where we make ourselves feel good for having studied the lsat ;;

that aside, if there's anyone who can benefit from this thread, it's you. hopefully by now, this thread has helped you become aware of the insufferable way in which you think and speak. this increased self-awareness, if you put it to good use, should help you with oci and making friends in ls.

I'm honestly surprised OP is still coming back to this thread - they copy-pasted the exact same thing on reddit with the exact same username and it basically did turn into a feel-good 'we're smarter b/c we studied LSAT' circle jerk over there.

Just more evidence that the LSAT subreddit is sub 160 compared to TLS

[claireosaurus-rex]

Studying for the LSAT can definitely change the way you think.
http://news.berkeley.edu/2012/08/22/int ... structure/

#micdrop

[Future Ex-Engineer]

Studying for the LSAT can definitely change the way you think.
http://news.berkeley.edu/2012/08/22/int ... structure/

#micdrop

I don't think that article means what you think it means.

It shows that test prep can alter brain pathways, but that doesn't mean it makes you smarter. The article even goes on to say that essentially you game IQ tests by doing this sort of thing, so they aren't a reliable indicator of intelligence or 'smartness'. Here's your mic back.

[Alexandros]

.

[LesPaul1995]

People don't score high on the LSAT without some serious studying and preparation, and although it requires some intelligence, it's not the determining factor. I'm sure there are countless people who bang out a 160 and are smarter than 170s. So I don't think the kids at the best schools are necessarily the "smartest," but they are probably hard working. Plus getting significantly smarter in the 4-6 months it takes you to study for the LSAT is a bit of a leap.

Perhaps you are correct and the LSAT merely resurfaces a potentiality that was less evident or already there in the individual. However, I fail to see how this is any different than what I am already stating. Just because this occurrence may be how it permeates in 99% of people, but I still believe it has the potentiality for causation of becoming smarter, namely in the capacity of logical reasoning faculties associated with becoming a lawyer.

potentiality.

even if we accept your premise, there's really no way of knowing. none of us can scientifically prove/disprove your claim. you can't objectively measure this kind of stuff like you can with math. so it really ends up being a waste of time. whatever discussion that arises from a hypothetical that cannot be resolved except by "feelings", conjectures, anecdotes, etc. is hardly going to get you closer to whatever truth you were seeking. unless you were just hoping for a circlejerk thread where we make ourselves feel good for having studied the lsat ;;

that aside, if there's anyone who can benefit from this thread, it's you. hopefully by now, this thread has helped you become aware of the insufferable way in which you think and speak. this increased self-awareness, if you put it to good use, should help you with oci and making friends in ls.

I'm honestly surprised OP is still coming back to this thread - they copy-pasted the exact same thing on reddit with the exact same username and it basically did turn into a feel-good 'we're smarter b/c we studied LSAT' circle jerk over there.

Just more evidence that the LSAT subreddit is sub 160 compared to TLS

You mean the thread you deleted your posts in because they were objectively flawed?

[Impressionist]

Playing devils advocate here, but i suppose a question worth asking is 'does learning new things make you smarter?'

I think most people would agree they learned some new stuff studying for the LSAT. For example I learned a lot about conditional reasoning that I previously did not know and I fully expect to maintain a basic understanding of conditional reasoning for the rest of my life. Further, while reading through hundreds of RC passages I definitely learned some random interesting things (who would have thought you'd learn so much about the dancing of bees studying for the LSAT!).

Whether or not actual pathways in the brain are changed to make us better thinkers I can't say, but all the work making inferences in games and the critical-thinking required for LR questions can't hurt I imagine.

Either way, who cares. Nobody should study for the LSAT to get smart; they should study it to go to law school. If you learn some neat stuff in the process, cool.

[MaryKayConvention]

No. Just richer (scholarship $$$).

[NYCounsel]

No. Just richer (scholarship $$$).

This. Except not richer. Just happy I'll be debt-free with a JD. At most I'll take out maybe 10K for non-tuition expenses.

[MaryKayConvention]

No. Just richer (scholarship $$$).

This. Except not richer. Just happy I'll be debt-free with a JD. At most I'll take out maybe 10K for non-tuition expenses.

Yeah that's what I meant. Should have said "improved net worth."

[Slippin' Jimmy]

Why was this cancerous thread bumped?