I have the empirical evidence to make my claim. The data in the December and October 2010 LSAT waiting threads strongly suggests that the average TLS user is more capable on the LSAT than the average LSAT taker.Ikki wrote:What? You need empirical evidence to make any and every claim. Unless, you're saying the average LSAT test taker is less capable than the average TLS user a priori, but then you would be talking metaphysics. Yes, I'm a phil major.niederbomb wrote:The average LSAT taker is less capable on the LSAT than the average TLS user. I don't need empirical data to make this claim, although if I weren't lazy, I could probably prove it statistically quite easily.Ikki wrote:How do you know what the average LSAT taker looks like?niederbomb wrote: Actually, I'd argue that the folks who take the LSAT are an innumerate, unfocused, jobless/underemployed subset of those who took the SAT. Whether or not some of these things correlate positively with IQ and education level is a different matter.
Remember, people, TLS =/ average LSAT taker.
I'm just too lazy to compile it, especially since this wasn't my main point.
My main point is that LSAT takers may well be stupider than the college graduate population as a whole, given the fact that they are considering law school while many of their peers are out getting real jobs, so the claim that the LSAT pool is "stronger" than the SAT pool may or may not be correct.
whymeohgodno wrote:
The majority of the LSAT taking population is objectively stupid.
