Law School Discussion

Law Students => Current Law Students => Topic started by: cbethun1 on December 07, 2004, 05:15:12 PM

Title: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: cbethun1 on December 07, 2004, 05:15:12 PM
How is the Bar Exam(Particularly interested in the Georgia Bar) set up.  Is it Multiple choice? Essay?
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: lawgirl on December 07, 2004, 06:16:39 PM
Go to http://www.barbri.com, choose your state (Georgia) and on that page (right hand side) scroll down and it will give a place to click for Bar Exam Format. That will give you the information you are looking for.

Basically, it is multiple choice, essay, and a performance test.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: 175 on November 13, 2005, 08:50:52 PM
Many multiple choice questions will have at least 2 (two) correct answers. Any one of these two will usually do. Some professors will change the answers to certain multiple-choice questions on their final AFTER it has been given to students -- this way the "correct people" will have scored higher overall than the "incorrect" ones.
Title: Patent Bar Exam
Post by: yanno on January 27, 2006, 04:10:26 PM
I took the PTO exam -- it was the epitome of the proverbial hoop that has to be jumped through. Most of the questions are poorly written and have little to do with practice. Indeed, when I took the Kayton course to prepare, Mr. Kayton said there was one exam where 28% of the questions were flawed in that there was either two correct answers, three correct answers or no correct answers. Well, in an open book exam with time constraints, its pretty disconcerning to try to pick the right answer when there is actually two or three right answers.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: newmommie on February 05, 2006, 08:30:23 PM
Hmmm!
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: sinita on February 06, 2006, 02:11:24 PM
This is indeed something I had never thought of!
Title: Re: Patent Bar Exam
Post by: in rem on February 08, 2006, 02:35:30 PM
I took the PTO exam -- it was the epitome of the proverbial hoop that has to be jumped through. Most of the questions are poorly written and have little to do with practice. Indeed, when I took the Kayton course to prepare, Mr. Kayton said there was one exam where 28% of the questions were flawed in that there was either two correct answers, three correct answers or no correct answers. Well, in an open book exam with time constraints, its pretty disconcerning to try to pick the right answer when there is actually two or three right answers.

I can see law professors as doing it (a dirty thing to do on their part!), but I can't imagine how bar exams could be created on purpose that way!
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: fab on February 10, 2006, 06:05:33 PM
Oh yeah, in rem?!
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: ela on February 13, 2006, 03:34:16 PM
The thing is that there are no official answers for Bar exam questions. The questions are concocted in the minds of professors and other non-practicing individuals. The official answers, or "checklists," are derived by taking a random sampling from all answers on the exam. The Bar then uses a series of meetings to use mathematical models to formulate an ESTIMATE what the best answers should be. These meetings are called CALLIBRATION SESSIONS. It is this calibration that the Committee uses to control the answers of the exam.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: yara on February 15, 2006, 02:47:21 AM
well well well pieces are coming together i guess
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: erstes on February 18, 2006, 11:08:49 AM
Those pieces were always together, yara ... except for the fact that they were supposed to stay apart!
Title: Even Top Lawyers Fail California Exam
Post by: barbra on March 29, 2006, 03:48:31 AM
Former Stanford Law Dean,
Becomes Latest Victim;
A Mayor Tries Four Times
__________________________

By JAMES BANDLER and NATHAN KOPPEL
Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
December 5, 2005; Page A1

Kathleen Sullivan is a noted constitutional scholar who has argued cases before the Supreme Court. Until recently, she was dean of Stanford Law School. In legal circles, she has been talked about as a potential Democratic nominee for the Supreme Court. But Ms. Sullivan recently became the latest prominent victim of California's notoriously difficult bar exam. Last month, the state sent out the results of its July test to 8,343 aspiring and already-practicing lawyers. More than half failed -- including Ms. Sullivan.

Although she is licensed to practice law in New York and Massachusetts, Ms. Sullivan was taking the California exam for the first time after joining a Los Angeles-based firm as an appellate specialist.

The California bar exam has created misery for thousands of aspiring and practicing lawyers. Former California Gov. Jerry Brown passed on his second try, while former Gov. Pete Wilson needed four attempts. The recently elected mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio R. Villaraigosa, never did pass the bar after failing four times.

(http://www.lawschool.com/HC-GH149_Sulliv_20051204191238.gif)

But it's unusual for the exam to claim a top-notch constitutional lawyer at the peak of her game. "She is a rock star," says William Urquhart, who last year recruited Ms. Sullivan to join his firm, Quinn Emanuel Urquhart Oliver & Hedges LLP. "Practically every lawyer in the U.S. knows who Kathleen Sullivan is." If anyone should have passed, Mr. Urquhart says, it is Ms. Sullivan. "The problem is not with Kathleen Sullivan, it is with the person who drafted the exam or the person who graded it."

Ms. Sullivan, 50 years old, did not return phone and email messages seeking comment. Her firm said she wasn't reachable over the weekend because she was at a remote location.

Mr. Urquhart says he does not know Ms. Sullivan's score, but knows she spent little time preparing because she was inundated with work for the firm and Stanford Law School, where she now runs the school's constitutional law center. Ms. Sullivan plans to take the test again, according to Mr. Urquhart. "She'll prepare more next time," he says. "My advice to her is that she should look at 15 bar questions and 15 sample, perfect answers. That is all she'll need to pass."

The California test, by all accounts, is tough. It lasts three days, as compared with two or 2½-day exams in most states. Only one state -- Delaware -- has a higher minimum passing score. According to the National Conference of Bar Examiners, just 44% of those taking the California bar in 2004 passed the exam, the lowest percentage in the country, versus a national average of 64%.

Like many professions, lawyers are regulated by the states, and nearly every state requires passage of a bar exam for attorneys to practice law. Some states grant reciprocity to out-of-state lawyers. California does not; to be licensed in the state, one must pass the California bar exam. This July's version of the California test aimed at lawyers licensed in other states -- like Ms. Sullivan -- claimed an unusually high percentage of victims.

The two-day test, which is identical to the longer exam but omits a long multiple-choice section, had just a 28% passage rate in July, an astoundingly low figure that state bar officials are at a loss to explain. Out-of-state lawyers can take the full three-day exam if they choose.

(http://www.lawschool.com/P1-AD805_CALBAR_20051204192305.gif)

Critics say the test is capricious, unreliable and a poor measure of future lawyering skills. Some also complain that California's system serves to protect the state's lawyers by excluding competition from out-of-state attorneys. There has been some loosening of the rules. California adopted rules last year permitting certain classes of lawyers to practice in the state without having to take the bar.

Gayle Murphy, the senior executive for admissions for the State Bar of California, says that the purpose of the bar exam is to protect the public, not to restrain competition. Great efforts are taken to make sure exam grading is fair, including use of multiple graders, she says. The exam includes six essays and two written performance tests. Each written part is assigned a separate grader. Test-takers who are close to the passing line are assigned nine more graders, so a borderline exam will have as many as 17 graders.

One reason for California's high failure rate, Ms. Murphy says, is that graduates of unaccredited and correspondence law schools are allowed in California to take the test. California's pass rate for ABA-approved schools is in line with those of other states, Ms. Murphy says. She says a possible reason for failures by practicing lawyers is that they simply don't have enough time to put in the requisite studying hours. Attending a premier law school doesn't guarantee success: former Gov. Wilson got his law degree from Berkeley, while former Gov. Brown went to Yale.

Aundrea Newsome, an attorney in Hermosa Beach, Calif., who passed the July test, limited her prep time to two months, but she worked eight to 10 hours a day, every day, during that stretch. "That is standard," she says. "You make a deal with the devil and give up two months of your life to pass."

Ms. Newsome, who graduated from the University of Southern California Law School in May, says preparing for the exam requires studying so many different legal fields, including such arcane topics as 18th-century criminal common law, that practical knowledge or even mastery of several legal subjects is not enough.

Robert Pfister, who was already licensed in Indiana, Connecticut and New York, also found the experience grueling. After the first morning of the exam, "you feel like your hand will fall off from writing so much," says Mr. Pfister, an associate with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP who passed the July exam in California. "After the second day, you just want to go home and sleep. But then you have to come back for a third day."

Mr. Pfister, who handles securities-fraud cases and had been practicing law for about four years before taking the California bar, recalls one question where he was asked to parse the law that would apply to a disabled child who was seeking to move to a housing complex. "You can be the greatest personal-injury lawyer in the country, or mergers and acquisitions lawyer," he says. "But the stuff they give you is often some area of law you haven't dealt with."

Former Gov. Wilson describes his need to take the bar exam four times as "frustrating." He blames his difficulties on his penmanship, which he says was not messy, but very slow. "To put it in the simplest terms, if I had not learned to type, I would never have passed it," says Mr. Wilson.

A spokesman for former Gov. Brown, who is currently mayor of Oakland, Calif., says several of his classmates from Yale also failed the exam, some of whom went on to be judges and prominent lawyers.

A native of New York City, Ms. Sullivan has an undergraduate degree from Cornell University and a law degree from Harvard University. She taught at both Stanford and Harvard before becoming dean of Stanford's law school in 1999. The author of a leading constitutional-law casebook, Ms. Sullivan has argued several cases before the Supreme Court. Earlier this spring, the nation's highest court ruled in favor of one of her clients, a California winegrowers' group, striking down state laws that restricted direct sales from vineyards to consumers.

Last year, after announcing she would step down from her Stanford post, Ms. Sullivan joined the Silicon Valley office of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart to head a new appellate practice.

Ms. Sullivan is unlikely to need as many attempts as Maxcy Dean Filer, who may hold the California bar endurance record, having passed in 1991 after 47 unsuccessful tries. The Compton, Calif., man, who says he'll practice any kind of law that "comes through the door -- except probate and bankruptcy," says he always tried to psych himself up before taking the test by repeating, "I didn't fail the bar, the bar failed me."

http://www.lawschool.com/deanfails.htm
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: LoverOfWomen on March 29, 2006, 11:19:13 AM
One of the compelling arguments in favor of the California bar exam is, however:

[image removed]
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: dable on April 02, 2006, 05:26:28 AM
Well, this explains it all, I guess

(http://www.lawschool.com/P1-AD805_CALBAR_20051204192305.gif)

Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: doesntallow on April 02, 2006, 05:28:33 AM
Well, this explains it all, I guess

(http://www.lawschool.com/P1-AD805_CALBAR_20051204192305.gif)



Not really! Read a little bit closer,

Quote
One reason for California's high failure rate, Ms. Murphy says, is that graduates of unaccredited and correspondence law schools are allowed in California to take the test. California's pass rate for ABA-approved schools is in line with those of other states, Ms. Murphy says.
 
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: lzd on April 02, 2006, 05:38:03 AM
Well, this explains it all, I guess

(http://www.lawschool.com/P1-AD805_CALBAR_20051204192305.gif)



Not really! Read a little bit closer,

Quote
One reason for California's high failure rate, Ms. Murphy says, is that graduates of unaccredited and correspondence law schools are allowed in California to take the test. California's pass rate for ABA-approved schools is in line with those of other states, Ms. Murphy says.
 


The reason why Ms. Sullivan failed is actually very simple: she is stupid.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: LoverOfWomen on April 02, 2006, 07:23:13 AM
Well, this explains it all, I guess

(http://www.lawschool.com/P1-AD805_CALBAR_20051204192305.gif)



Not really! Read a little bit closer,

Quote
One reason for California's high failure rate, Ms. Murphy says, is that graduates of unaccredited and correspondence law schools are allowed in California to take the test. California's pass rate for ABA-approved schools is in line with those of other states, Ms. Murphy says.
 


The reason why Ms. Sullivan failed is actually very simple: she is stupid.


Yet far more prestigious than you!  Ding!
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: scrotum on April 03, 2006, 06:07:19 AM
Well, this explains it all, I guess

(http://www.lawschool.com/P1-AD805_CALBAR_20051204192305.gif)



Not really! Read a little bit closer,

Quote
One reason for California's high failure rate, Ms. Murphy says, is that graduates of unaccredited and correspondence law schools are allowed in California to take the test. California's pass rate for ABA-approved schools is in line with those of other states, Ms. Murphy says.
 


The reason why Ms. Sullivan failed is actually very simple: she is stupid.


She's not stupid, she just thought they would give her a pass just because she was Stafford's dean ..
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: epi on April 03, 2006, 06:11:13 AM

The reason why Ms. Sullivan failed is actually very simple: she is stupid.


She's not stupid, she just thought they would give her a pass just because she was Stafford's dean ..

Which boils down to being stupid .. they did jack her up, but her score was so low that they just couldn't give her a pass ..
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: LoverOfWomen on April 04, 2006, 12:12:48 AM

The reason why Ms. Sullivan failed is actually very simple: she is stupid.


She's not stupid, she just thought they would give her a pass just because she was Stafford's dean ..

Still more prestigious!  Ding!

Which boils down to being stupid .. they did jack her up, but her score was so low that they just couldn't give her a pass ..
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: eastman on April 07, 2006, 05:45:56 AM

The reason why Ms. Sullivan failed is actually very simple: she is stupid.


She's not stupid, she just thought they would give her a pass just because she was Stafford's dean ..

Which boils down to being stupid .. they did jack her up, but her score was so low that they just couldn't give her a pass ..

I wouldn't say stupid ... maybe she just did not study enough, thinking they'd give her a pass because she was Stanford's dean ... but I may be wrong, of course ...
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: natanchik1 on April 07, 2006, 06:40:49 PM
Anyone interested in the multiple choice questions on the Multistate bar should definately enroll in a PMBR course.  You can do so at www.easypmbr.com.  It is a great site put together by one of PMBR's reps, and makes the enrollment process simple. 
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: tamika on April 09, 2006, 05:42:34 AM

The reason why Ms. Sullivan failed is actually very simple: she is stupid.


She's not stupid, she just thought they would give her a pass just because she was Stafford's dean ..

Which boils down to being stupid .. they did jack her up, but her score was so low that they just couldn't give her a pass ..

I wouldn't say stupid ... maybe she just did not study enough, thinking they'd give her a pass because she was Stanford's dean ... but I may be wrong, of course ...

Even if she did not study hard, she's Stanford's dean, she has already taken two states bar exams and you just can not attribute her failure to her lack of preparation. Does the definition of "assault," "battery," "specific performance" and the like change over time, or from state to state?! Does California have a much different definition of "principal in the second degree" compared to New York?! Not really!
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: marian on April 15, 2006, 10:23:41 AM

Even if she did not study hard, she's Stanford's dean, she has already taken two states bar exams and you just can not attribute her failure to her lack of preparation. Does the definition of "assault," "battery," "specific performance" and the like change over time, or from state to state?! Does California have a much different definition of "principal in the second degree" compared to New York?! Not really!


Kathleen Sullivan is a stupid female private part period.

Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: J D on April 15, 2006, 11:48:50 AM

The reason why Ms. Sullivan failed is actually very simple: she is stupid.


She's not stupid, she just thought they would give her a pass just because she was Stafford's dean ..

Which boils down to being stupid .. they did jack her up, but her score was so low that they just couldn't give her a pass ..

I wouldn't say stupid ... maybe she just did not study enough, thinking they'd give her a pass because she was Stanford's dean ... but I may be wrong, of course ...

Even if she did not study hard, she's Stanford's dean, she has already taken two states bar exams and you just can not attribute her failure to her lack of preparation. Does the definition of "assault," "battery," "specific performance" and the like change over time, or from state to state?! Does California have a much different definition of "principal in the second degree" compared to New York?! Not really!

Actually, criminal and tort law can vary significantly from state to state.  Regarding the example you gave, I don't know for certain (I would guess not, but only because the definition of "principal" is pretty uncontroversial) but the criminal laws of NY and CA differ markedly, since NY is for the most part an MPC jurisdiction, while CA is not.  For example, in NY, the rules regarding the mens rea needed for conviction would differ tremendously from the rules CA has on the subject (CA actually tries to distinguish between "specific intent" and "general intent," for example; NY only cares about "purpose").  Besides, as mentioned in the article, the CA bar examiners often test matters that more properly belong to legal history than anything else.  Most other states could not care less how a hypothetical case would turn out in 18th century England; they want to see whether you know how that case would turn out NOW in that jurisdiction!

Besides, the argument you make regarding the relative stability of legal rules over time and across US jurisdictions proves too much.  If all that you argue is really the case, then one wouldn't excpect to see such low bar passage rates for the CA bar exam (both from first time law school graduates AND from lawyers sitting for the CA bar who have already passed another state's exam), unless sitting for the CA bar exam logically correlates with stupidity or laziness in some way.  It's a hard exam.  No one denies this.  Thus, it's hard to justify the position that a demonstrably qualified legal practicioner is "stupid" merely because she didn't pass the CA bar. 
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: sdlaw on April 15, 2006, 03:14:11 PM
I passed the actual bar that she took, I do not think she is dumb but rather was unprepared.  My belief is that she thought given her experience she did not need to study, and from what I have read she was too busy to study alot.  But what she failed to take into account was that she is a very talented lawyer in one area, while the bar tests on many areas.  Also the bar exam likes a certain style of writing, many short paragraphs with the point being right out there rather than in the middle of a paragraph.  So I would judge her failure more on being underprepared and over confident rather than stupidity.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: erinbrockovich on April 17, 2006, 02:09:11 PM
hahaha
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: miamivice on April 18, 2006, 04:19:07 PM

Also the bar exam likes a certain style of writing, many short paragraphs with the point being right out there rather than in the middle of a paragraph.


Are the essays scored by a computer or by a real person?
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: substantianigra on April 19, 2006, 04:28:36 AM
LOL miami, I know what ya mean! ;)
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: bong on April 27, 2006, 08:06:16 PM
Interesting thread
Title: Re: Patent Bar Exam
Post by: oblada on May 03, 2006, 09:28:04 AM
I took the PTO exam -- it was the epitome of the proverbial hoop that has to be jumped through. Most of the questions are poorly written and have little to do with practice. Indeed, when I took the Kayton course to prepare, Mr. Kayton said there was one exam where 28% of the questions were flawed in that there was either two correct answers, three correct answers or no correct answers. Well, in an open book exam with time constraints, its pretty disconcerning to try to pick the right answer when there is actually two or three right answers.

Some researchers in cognitive psychology have divided the thinking process into at least two levels: a surface level concerned mostly with retrieving information, and a deep cognitive level involving the synthesis and analysis of a variety of sources of information in order to interpret that information, solve a complicated problem, or create something new. A study that examined the thinking styles of 530 students and their performance on the SAT suggests that standardized tests may penalize students that tend to favor deeper approaches to problem solving. The researchers found that the group that scored highest on the SAT tended to use more superficial thinking strategies than those who scored in the low and moderate ranges. Also, the lowest-ranking students employed the deep approach more often than the higher scoring students. Of course some of the high scoring individuals may be extraordinarily capable, as they may possess some of the important qualities that the tests fail to detect. But these studies strongly suggest that standardized tests fail to measure the qualities that are truly important, reward the ability to adopt a superficial style of thinking, and may in fact penalize many of the candidates with the deepest minds.

This criticism of standardized tests is not new. Banesh Hoffman, professor of mathematics and former collaborator with Albert Einstein, made exactly this point in his 1962 book "The Tyranny of Testing." According to Dr. Hoffman, it is the multiple-choice format that is to blame. "Multiple choice tests penalize the deep student, dampen creativity, foster intellectual dishonesty, and undermine the very foundations of education" he remarked in a 1977 interview. What is it about multiple-choice tests that penalize the finer mind? Occasionally, individual questions are defective, with the wanted answer or all of the answers being incorrect. More frequently, questions are ambiguous so that more than one answer may be defended as plausibly being "the best", and only those candidates with deep minds are likely to notice the ambiguity and be troubled by it. However, according to Dr. Hoffman,

Quote
"It is not the presence of defective questions that makes the multiple-choice tests bad. Such questions merely make them worse. Even if all the questions were impeccable, the deep student would see more in a question than his more superficial competitors would ever dream was in it, and would expend more time and mental energy than them in answering it. That is the way his mind works. That is, indeed, his special merit. But the multiple-choice tests are concerned solely with the candidates choice of answer, and not with the reasons for his choise. Thus they ignore that elusive yet crucial thing we call quality."
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: cookiebum on May 12, 2006, 05:37:43 AM
The Sullivan lady ... she didn't study enough ... I think ...
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: silvercannonca on May 17, 2006, 11:58:41 AM
"Some professors will change the answers to certain multiple-choice questions on their final AFTER it has been given to students -- this way the "correct people" will have scored higher overall than the "incorrect" ones"

^^^^sounds to me like someone couldn't admit they are wrong.  and just HOW does the professor know which mc belongs to which student so they can pick the "correct" one?
Title: here
Post by: goldenchain on May 17, 2006, 08:08:04 PM
http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/students/index.php/topic,3530.0.html
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: watchtell on May 29, 2006, 06:12:11 PM
Interesting!
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: scdd on May 30, 2006, 05:47:03 AM
Very intersting, actually!
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: niggalaw on May 31, 2006, 07:07:27 PM
The Sullivan lady ... she didn't study enough ... I think ...

LOL cookiebum! ;)
Title: Re: Patent Bar Exam
Post by: K9 on June 01, 2006, 06:33:08 PM
I took the PTO exam -- it was the epitome of the proverbial hoop that has to be jumped through. Most of the questions are poorly written and have little to do with practice. Indeed, when I took the Kayton course to prepare, Mr. Kayton said there was one exam where 28% of the questions were flawed in that there was either two correct answers, three correct answers or no correct answers. Well, in an open book exam with time constraints, its pretty disconcerning to try to pick the right answer when there is actually two or three right answers.

Could someone vouch for the veracity of this post?
Title: Re: Patent Bar Exam
Post by: blackjesus on July 13, 2006, 02:54:34 PM
I took the PTO exam -- it was the epitome of the proverbial hoop that has to be jumped through. Most of the questions are poorly written and have little to do with practice. Indeed, when I took the Kayton course to prepare, Mr. Kayton said there was one exam where 28% of the questions were flawed in that there was either two correct answers, three correct answers or no correct answers. Well, in an open book exam with time constraints, its pretty disconcerning to try to pick the right answer when there is actually two or three right answers.

Could someone vouch for the veracity of this post?


Anyone?
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: oldthreadsfutures on August 05, 2006, 07:21:44 AM
 :o
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: theworldinahand on November 06, 2006, 09:38:54 PM

Very intersting, actually!


Wow, scdd, you've only made 2 posts, yet you've a reputation of -3!!! Isn't that funny?!
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: blasé on August 19, 2007, 07:55:25 PM

Even if she did not study hard, she's Stanford's dean, she has already taken two states bar exams and you just can not attribute her failure to her lack of preparation. Does the definition of "assault," "battery," "specific performance" and the like change over time, or from state to state?! Does California have a much different definition of "principal in the second degree" compared to New York?! Not really!


Do you know that Hillary Clinton did not pass the District of Columbia bar exam on her first attempt? In fact, it was because she passed the Arkansas bar exam, but not the DC one, that she chose to follow her heart instead of her mind, going with Bill Clinton to Arkansas, rather than staying in Washington where her career prospects were best. During 1974 she was a member of the impeachment inquiry staff in Washington, D.C., advising the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate scandal, which culminated in the resignation of Nixon in August 1974; by then, she was viewed as someone with a bright political future -- Democratic political organizer and consultant Betsey Wright had moved from Texas to Washington the previous year to help guide her career thinking she had the potential to one day become a Senator or President
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: downthechimney2nite on August 20, 2007, 03:56:06 PM

Even if she did not study hard, she's Stanford's dean, she has already taken two states bar exams and you just can not attribute her failure to her lack of preparation. Does the definition of "assault," "battery," "specific performance" and the like change over time, or from state to state?! Does California have a much different definition of "principal in the second degree" compared to New York?! Not really!


Do you know that Hillary Clinton did not pass the District of Columbia bar exam on her first attempt? In fact, it was because she passed the Arkansas bar exam, but not the DC one, that she chose to follow her heart instead of her mind, going with Bill Clinton to Arkansas, rather than staying in Washington where her career prospects were best. During 1974 she was a member of the impeachment inquiry staff in Washington, D.C., advising the House Committee on the Judiciary during the Watergate scandal, which culminated in the resignation of Nixon in August 1974; by then, she was viewed as someone with a bright political future -- Democratic political organizer and consultant Betsey Wright had moved from Texas to Washington the previous year to help guide her career thinking she had the potential to one day become a Senator or President


You seem to believe that Clinton is smarter than Sullivan. Well, that certainly does not have to be the case. Clinton may be politically-savvy, but that does not necessarily mean she's better "brains" than Sullivan.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: foray on August 21, 2007, 03:32:30 AM

You seem to believe that Clinton is smarter than Sullivan. Well, that certainly does not have to be the case. Clinton may be politically-savvy, but that does not necessarily mean she's better "brains" than Sullivan.


Hill has had a lot of extracurriculars ... but no genius there ...
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: dissipate on August 21, 2007, 06:05:34 PM

Hill has had a lot of extracurriculars ... but no genius there ...


Well, as far as a politician is concerned, that's what it really matters -- being socially active, having people skills -- you don't have to an intellectual genius to get into, and be successful, in politics.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: apiary on August 22, 2007, 03:04:34 AM

[...] In fact, it was because she passed the Arkansas bar exam, but not the DC one, that she chose to follow her heart instead of her mind, going with Bill Clinton to Arkansas, rather than staying in Washington where her career prospects were best. [...]


Interesting, I didn't know this!
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: pluck on September 15, 2007, 11:20:11 AM

Do you know that Hillary Clinton did not pass the District of Columbia bar exam on her first attempt? In fact, it was because she passed the Arkansas bar exam, but not the DC one, that she chose to follow her heart instead of her mind, going with Bill Clinton to Arkansas, rather than staying in Washington where her career prospects were best. [...]


May it not be that she subconsciously wanted to fail the DC bar exam so that she'd have a justification to go to Arkansas?! Just a suggestion..
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: unexceptionable on September 17, 2007, 08:35:41 AM

Also the bar exam likes a certain style of writing, many short paragraphs with the point being right out there rather than in the middle of a paragraph.


Are the essays scored by a computer or by a real person?


Real people.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: s u n d a y on September 22, 2007, 10:27:11 PM

Also the bar exam likes a certain style of writing, many short paragraphs with the point being right out there rather than in the middle of a paragraph.


Are the essays scored by a computer or by a real person?


Real people.


Even if they wanted to create some kind of computer program to score the essays, they'd not dare to use it.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: Cafe Cargo on February 03, 2008, 11:12:54 AM

Even if they wanted to create some kind of computer program to score the essays, they'd not dare to use it.


??
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: multiplechoice on August 02, 2008, 07:51:49 PM

Also the bar exam likes a certain style of writing, many short paragraphs with the point being right out there rather than in the middle of a paragraph.


Are the essays scored by a computer or by a real person?


Real people.


Even if they wanted to create some kind of computer program to score the essays, they'd not dare to use it.


Keep thinking and hoping they wouldn't do that, s u n d a y! Do you expect them to have any scruples?
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: just sex on August 07, 2008, 08:15:55 PM

Hill has had a lot of extracurriculars ... but no genius there ...


Well, as far as a politician is concerned, that's what it really matters -- being socially active, having people skills -- you don't have to an intellectual genius to get into, and be successful, in politics.


You hit the nail on the @ # ! * i n g head! For those type of jobs, SOCIAL SKILLS is the most important qualification.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: s t u f f on August 08, 2008, 12:07:08 AM

Well, as far as a politician is concerned, that's what it really matters -- being socially active, having people skills -- you don't have to an intellectual genius to get into, and be successful, in politics.


You hit the nail on the @ # ! * i n g head! For those type of jobs, SOCIAL SKILLS is the most important qualification.


Or, more appropriately, being a whore, whoring.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: Kore on August 14, 2008, 10:41:14 PM
I interviewed at a couple of places for a position as an SA and at both of them it was just like I was screened whether I'd perform well as a whore on board... you know, that was the kind of attitude from the interviewing personnel (I got out right away after 10-15 minutes, taken into account my character and personality).

A couple of guys looked real good, though - I left out thinking it'd be kind of fun to go out with them once or twice.. As for working there, thanks a lot, still not whoring away.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: black widow on August 16, 2008, 08:48:48 AM
Don't lose hope, Kore - there will be someone out there who'll treat you as a real law professional - not like the next "hot babe" of the week - take the word of a mother who was in your position many years back!

And maybe one day you'll understand that this "little advice" you're getting today from me is worth a million! :)

 
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: Teach Me Tiger on October 07, 2008, 05:36:21 PM

Well, as far as a politician is concerned, that's what it really matters -- being socially active, having people skills -- you don't have to an intellectual genius to get into, and be successful, in politics.


You hit the nail on the @ # ! * i n g head! For those type of jobs, SOCIAL SKILLS is the most important qualification.


Or, more appropriately, being a whore, whoring.


Are you being literal or figurative, stuff? Or both?
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: whit1981 on October 10, 2008, 11:27:14 AM
OHIO:

Day 1:
(a) 9am-12pm: 6 essays (1/2 hour each)

(b) 1pm-4pm: 2 MPTs (90 minutes each)

Day 2:
(a) 9am-12pm: 100 MBE (multiple-choice) questions

(b) 1pm-4pm: 100 MBE questions (total of 200)

Day 2.5

(a) 9am-12pm: 6 essay questions

(b) 1pm until October 31: sweat bullets until results are released.
 
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: rhesusman on October 11, 2008, 09:34:02 AM
Many multiple choice questions will have at least 2 (two) correct answers. Any one of these two will usually do. Some professors will change the answers to certain multiple-choice questions on their final AFTER it has been given to students -- this way the "correct people" will have scored higher overall than the "incorrect" ones.

If you're talking about the bar exam, this is certainly NOT the case.  The MBE, which is the multiple choice portion of the bar exam in most states, including Georgia, may have one or two questions where more than one answer is credited, but that's against 198 questions which only have one correct answer.

Georgia might be one of those jurisdictions that only grades your essays if you're within a certain score range on the MBE.  The thinking is that people who score below a certain amount almost certainly won't score high enough on the essays to pass and that people who score above a certain amount almost certainly scored high enough on the essays, so there's no point in grading them.
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: Modus Barbara on October 11, 2008, 10:56:27 AM
But of course, rhesus, this individual looks like someone who's been passed over, one who's feeling sour because he did not make the Dean's List or something, because he was not credited for 1-2 more multiple choice questions... lol
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: Katerini on November 12, 2008, 04:33:37 PM

The thing is that there are no official answers for Bar exam questions. The questions are concocted in the minds of professors and other non-practicing individuals. The official answers, or "checklists," are derived by taking a random sampling from all answers on the exam. The Bar then uses a series of meetings to use mathematical models to formulate an ESTIMATE what the best answers should be. These meetings are called CALLIBRATION SESSIONS. It is this calibration that the Committee uses to control the answers of the exam.


That's intriguing, could you expand a bit further?
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: beyond aurora on February 05, 2009, 06:38:19 PM

The thing is that there are no official answers for Bar exam questions. The questions are concocted in the minds of professors and other non-practicing individuals. The official answers, or "checklists," are derived by taking a random sampling from all answers on the exam. The Bar then uses a series of meetings to use mathematical models to formulate an ESTIMATE what the best answers should be. These meetings are called CALLIBRATION SESSIONS. It is this calibration that the Committee uses to control the answers of the exam.


Oh please, ela, stop it! That's ridiculous!

I was talking to one of my neighbors today about the Arkansas doctor injured by a car bomb and he was like, it was done in revenge by someone who not certified by him as Chairman of the Medical Board. Now that sounded hilarious to me! Up to now nothing has been clarified:

(http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/9961/05arkansas1600sh1.jpg)
An investigator at the home of Dr. Trent P. Pierce, chairman of the Arkansas State Medical Board, after the blast Wednesday.

By LIZ ROBBINS
Published: February 4, 2009

A bomb exploded Wednesday morning in the driveway of the chairman of the Arkansas medical board in West Memphis, Ark., critically injuring him, the authorities said. The chairman, Trent P. Pierce, 54, a family practice physician, was taken by air to the Regional Medical Center in Memphis, just across the Mississippi River, where a hospital spokeswoman said he was in critical condition Wednesday evening. "We just don’t know why someone would do this," the police chief, Robert Paudert, told reporters who had gathered down the street from Dr. Pierce's house. "We don't know if it was a random act, or someone specifically targeted him." Chief Paudert said Wednesday evening that officials had no suspects, but that the local authorities were waiting for the ATF to conclude its investigation at the scene. Dr. Pierce underwent surgery to remove metal debris from his abdomen and to repair damage to his eyes and his face, said a close friend and neighbor, Scott Ferguson, who is also a physician. Dr. Ferguson, who was with the family at the hospital in Memphis, spoke with Dr. Pierce's trauma team, including the ophthalmologist, Dr. Chris Fleming.

"Dr. Fleming says there is severe trauma to the left eye but the right eye is intact," Dr. Ferguson said. He added that Dr. Pierce had suffered burns on his hands, face and legs. "His heart is good, there is no brain injury, and that's very encouraging," Dr. Ferguson said. It was not clear whether the bomb was in the driveway or inside the doctor's car, a white Lexus hybrid sport-utility vehicle. Chief Paudert said investigators were not sure whether Dr. Pierce was inside the car when the bomb detonated. The explosion, which happened around 8 a.m., was heard as far away as a mile, the police chief said. Chief Paudert said Dr. Pierce, who is well known and respected in the area, was not known to be involved in any legal or other disputes, and did not perform abortions in his practice. Dr. Ferguson confirmed that. The police chief, who said Dr. Pierce was his personal physician, said the doctor was the only person injured in the blast.

Drew Wade, a spokesman for the firearms bureau in Washington, said 18 special agents from three states were working on the case in cooperation with the F.B.I. and the local police. A neighbor on North Avalon Street in the upper-income neighborhood where Dr. Pierce lives described hearing the blast. "I heard a strong explosion, and then a lighter one right after that," the neighbor, Hollis Gibbs, said in an interview. "I thought it was a transformer, or that gas had built up in the house and exploded." William Trice, a lawyer for the medical board, described Dr. Pierce in an interview as "a very mild-mannered, well-educated, caring doctor." "He's also been a very good chairman, and cares about the people of Arkansas," Mr. Trice added. "He has always upheld the highest standards of care." Dr. Pierce was appointed to the board in 1997 by Mike Huckabee, the governor at the time, and he was reappointed in 2005. His term expires in 2012.

The state medical board supervises licenses of health care professionals and can suspend or revoke licenses. The Associated Press reported that Dr. Pierce had been scheduled to travel to Little Rock on Wednesday afternoon to attend board subcommittee meetings. Mr. Trice said that while the medical board sometimes had to make difficult decisions about the licensing of physicians, he was unaware of any current controversies involving the board or Dr. Pierce. "I doubt seriously if any recent board decisions had anything to do with this," Mr. Trice said. "The chairman usually doesn't vote, except to break a tie," he said, adding that he could recall no such votes in recent years.
Title: :
Post by: footfite on February 12, 2009, 06:58:25 PM
beyond, great avatar - time as a spiral!
Title: Re: :
Post by: inplainenglish on March 17, 2009, 02:45:08 PM

beyond, great avatar - time as a spiral!


Time as a spiral?

Could you tell us more?
Title: Re: :
Post by: Miliga on March 17, 2009, 04:14:33 PM

beyond, great avatar - time as a spiral!


Time as a spiral?

Could you tell us more?


Me too would be very interesting to know a little bit on the notion!
Title: Re: Clinton Wants Off the International Merry-Go-Round
Post by: c o l o m b u s on February 29, 2012, 04:06:41 PM

(http://img168.imageshack.us/img168/7987/sunitylargemb9.jpg)

Obama rolls out national security team

President-elect Barack Obama on Monday announced Sen. Hillary Clinton as his pick for secretary of state, calling her an "American of tremendous stature who will have my complete confidence."

"Hillary's appointment is a sign to friend and foe of the seriousness of my commitment to renew American diplomacy and restore our alliances," Obama said at a news conference in Chicago, Illinois. "I have no doubt that Hillary Clinton is the right person to lead our State Department and to work with me in tackling this ambitious foreign policy agenda."

[...]

"Mr. President-elect, I am proud to join you on what will be a difficult and exciting adventure in this new century," she said at the news conference. Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton, who was not at the event Monday, issued a statement expressing his support for his wife. "In her service to the people of New York and our nation, Hillary has demonstrated the knowledge, passion, resilience, and capacity to learn that our country needs at this critical time. "She loves being a senator from New York, but as she has in all the 37 years I've known her, she answered the call to serve. I commend President-Elect Obama for asking her to be a part of a great national security team. America will be well-served," he said in a statement.

"New York will lose a powerful voice in the Senate. But the nation will gain a powerful voice in the world. Sen. Clinton's wisdom and record of leadership will make her a strong advocate for the cause of liberty, human rights, and the rule of law," he said in a written statement. In assuming this new post, Clinton will have some control of her staffing, like picking the assistant secretaries, according to sources familiar with the negotiations. [...] Asked Monday how he can be sure that his administration will function as a team of rivals and not a clash of rivals, Obama said he has assembled a group of "outstanding public servants" who share a core vision for the country.

[...] As for Clinton, some observers have raised concerns about her husband and suggested that the former president's international business dealings, global foundation and penchant for going off script could present a significant obstacle for the incoming commander-in-chief. "These are issues that I'm sure are being discussed, and they will have to be worked out, and it's legitimate to ask these questions," said James Carville, a former aide to the Clintons and CNN contributor. Obama's transition team was given access to Bill Clinton's finances and post-presidential dealings, sources said. As part of the early vetting process, the team looked for any negative information that could jeopardize the prospect of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state.

A particular issue of concern, observers said, was the donor list of Bill Clinton's global foundation, which might show connections to international figures who push policies that could conflict with those of the new Obama administration. Since exiting the Oval Office eight years ago, Clinton has reportedly raised more than $500 million for the foundation, a significant portion of which financed the construction of his presidential library. The foundation has also doled out millions for AIDS relief in Africa and other charitable causes around the world. Amid repeated criticism from Sen. Clinton's primary opponents, Bill Clinton would not reveal the extent of the foundation's donor list earlier this year. [...]


Life as Secretary of State is a carrousal, says Hillary Clinton, who wants to get off of the international merry-go-round — in 18 months, which happens to coincide with the end of President Barack Obama's first term. She still finds her work fascinating, but her nation-hopping and other duties leave her "perpetually tired" and she yearns to settle down, too, she told a BBC interviewer Thursday.

But she also sees a life beyond the global horizon, saying, "I think that I am a pretty normal, average person, despite all of the hype. And I am very interested in spending time with my friends and my family and not being on the merry-go-round all the time."

That brings up an issue no woman wants to hear from friends, Clinton notes with a chuckle. "My friends call and email saying, 'Oh, my gosh, I saw you on television. You looked so tired.' Which I send back saying, 'Gee, thanks a lot.' But I know, because if you work around the clock like we do, that's just inevitable. So I do try to take some time, long weekends, take some deep breathing. I do exercise, yoga, those kinds of things. But no, I'm never tired about the work. It's just the physical challenge."

"I was just walking through the mall here and had some young women come up and shout at me and tell me how much they appreciated me. And I think for young women and not so young women, there is a connection. They know that I've spent a lot of time working on women's issues and they care about what I'm doing and what it might mean for them."
Title: Re: Bar Exam Structure.....
Post by: C a s i n o on March 02, 2012, 02:07:22 PM

Scarcity is not a problem any more nowadays, and yet the dog-eat-dog-world-out-there philosophy is well alive - actually I was looking at another post talking about such.


On January 28, 1986, the space shuttle Challenger exploded seconds after launching. Seven astronauts, including a civilian schoolteacher, perished in a fireball of smoke and flames. The decision had been made to go ahead with the launch despite a near disaster on an earlier Challenger flight and despite strenuous objections and warnings from knowledgeable engineers about the defective O-rings at the joints of the booster rockets. Were key NASA administrators ignorant of the danger or cavalier about the lives of the astronauts? I doubt it.

NASA had already conducted 2-dozen successful launches with essentially the same equipment. With their confidence boosted by previous successes, administrators were oriented toward a "go" decision. Second, NASA officials, like the general public, were caught up in the enthusiasm surrounding the launching of the first civilian (schoolteacher Christa McAuliffe) into space. Further, there were additional, practical reasons for NASA people to be victimized by their own wishful thinking: given NASA's need to secure congressional funding by displaying its efficiency and productivity, with the intense public interest in the "teacher in space" program and its wish to demonstrate its technological capabilities, lift-off was a more desirable decision than delay. Any mention of possible system failure would have suggested a need to spend more money, a conclusion NASA found distasteful in light of its commitment to cost-effectiveness and economy.

Unlike NASA administrators, engineers at Morton Thiokol (the company that manufactured the solid rocket boosters) were not concerned about the political, economic, and public relations implications of a decision on whether or not to launch. All they cared about was whether or not the damn thing would work - and given the subfreezing temperatures at the launch site, they objected strenuously to the launch. But the top execs at Morton were not so fortunate. For them, more was at stake than a successful launch. They were in great conflict. On the one hand, as engineers, they were sensitive to the opinions of their fellow engineers. On the other hand, as execs, they were dependent on NASA for a contract worth approximately $400 million per year. Thus, in part, they tended to identify with the same concerns that NASA administrators did. Robert Lund, Thiokol's vice president for engineering, at first opposed the launch but changed his position after he was advised to "take off his engineering hat and put on one representing management." How did Morton execs such as Lund deal with this conflict? Before their last conference with NASA administrators, they polled Thiokol employees but not the engineers - only other management personnel, who voted to "go" with the launch. Thus, in a conference between NASA officials and Thiokol execs the night before the fateful launch, participants reinforced one another's commitment to proceed.


I can't believe this country would appropriate a h e l l of a lot of money to an agency like NASA! Just imagine if all that money were used to better the lives of people on this planet, or this country, if you like! How much less misery would be?!

It's not that they don't get it, it's because they want the resources to be distributed disproportionately among people, that they go ahead and throw money to the toilet! It would be far too dangerous for the people in power to have the standard of living of the people they oppress raised even a little bit; because the latter would be able to think a bit more as to what it is that keeps them oppressed, poor and hungry! Question the very ideology that keeps the oppressors in power!


Incitatus says the money appropriated to NASA is basically thrown to the trash can (pressing on the alternative social, practical uses of the money) - now to me that means living like an animal, just satisfying the basic needs, without having to sorta figure out where we are, where do we live, where do we come from, and where do we go .. are there any other civilizations like ours (regardless of the fact that may or may not be friendly towards us - with our curiosity having the potential to backfire, par exemple)

I mean, think about it, it's much more comforting to think we know where do we stand, what our planet Earth is, and yes - how small/unimportant compared to the whole of the Universe!

In fact - it is such - that should hopefully cut our egos down to size, for us not to treat each other like one guy were god and the other one just a Dog out there! Makes us understand that we all "belong," share the same characteristics, ultimate fate, and the like!
Title: Re: Off the I'national Marry-Go-Around
Post by: garçon on March 11, 2012, 06:53:56 PM

Life as Secretary of State is a carrousal, says Hillary Clinton, who wants to get off of the international merry-go-round — in 18 months, which happens to coincide with the end of President Barack Obama's first term. She still finds her work fascinating, but her nation-hopping and other duties leave her "perpetually tired" and she yearns to settle down, too, she told a BBC interviewer Thursday.

But she also sees a life beyond the global horizon, saying, "I think that I am a pretty normal, average person, despite all of the hype. And I am very interested in spending time with my friends and my family and not being on the merry-go-round all the time."

That brings up an issue no woman wants to hear from friends, Clinton notes with a chuckle. "My friends call and email saying, 'Oh, my gosh, I saw you on television. You looked so tired.' Which I send back saying, 'Gee, thanks a lot.' But I know, because if you work around the clock like we do, that's just inevitable. So I do try to take some time, long weekends, take some deep breathing. I do exercise, yoga, those kinds of things. But no, I'm never tired about the work. It's just the physical challenge."

"I was just walking through the mall here and had some young women come up and shout at me and tell me how much they appreciated me. And I think for young women and not so young women, there is a connection. They know that I've spent a lot of time working on women's issues and they care about what I'm doing and what it might mean for them."


I'm sure she doesn't regret taking the job up - I mean, with prospects to become US president being deem in 2012 - what else could she have done, desiring, as she appeared to, to continue to be politically active?
Title: Re: Off the I'national Marry-Go-Around
Post by: Merci on March 12, 2012, 01:25:19 PM

But she also sees a life beyond the global horizon, saying, "I think that I am a pretty normal, average person, despite all of the hype. And I am very interested in spending time with my friends and my family and not being on the merry-go-round all the time."

That brings up an issue no woman wants to hear from friends, Clinton notes with a chuckle. "My friends call and email saying, 'Oh, my gosh, I saw you on television. You looked so tired.' Which I send back saying, 'Gee, thanks a lot.' But I know, because if you work around the clock like we do, that's just inevitable. So I do try to take some time, long weekends, take some deep breathing. I do exercise, yoga, those kinds of things. But no, I'm never tired about the work. It's just the physical challenge."

"I was just walking through the mall here and had some young women come up and shout at me and tell me how much they appreciated me. And I think for young women and not so young women, there is a connection. They know that I've spent a lot of time working on women's issues and they care about what I'm doing and what it might mean for them."


No doubt she could have chosen to not take the job up - that it was her own decision to become SOS for the Obama administration.

I tend to think she wanted to make some kind of statement in politics as a woman, before it was too late. She could not become the first woman President, but at least she would not be remembered just as the First Lady during the husband days.
Title: Re: "Buffer" / "Foot-in-th-Door"
Post by: shameless on March 27, 2012, 02:26:45 PM
Quote
Quote
Quote



Will you walk, the CD Theory is all too complex to fully explain it here - I'd focus instead on the practical applications of the Dissonance Theory. That's because one of the reasons it has inspired much research is its ability to explain phenomena not readily explainable by common sense. For instance, dissonance theory has been used as a way to understand events that totally confound our imagination - like the enormous power certain cult leaders like Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Marshall Herff Applewhite have had over the hearts and minds of their followers.

Take for instance Jim Jones. It goes without saying that the massacre at Jonestown was tragic in the extreme. It is beyond comprehension that a single person could make hundreds of people kill themselves and their own children.



(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/02-jones-jim_ji.jpg)

"Jim" Jones was the founder and leader of the "Peoples Temple," best known for the Nov 18, 1978 mass suicide of 909 Temple members in Jonestown, Guyana, along with the killings of 5 other people at a nearby airstrip. Over 200 children were murdered at Jonestown, almost all of whom were forcefully made to ingest cyanide by the elite Temple members. Jones was born in Indiana and started the Temple in that state in the 1950s. Jones and the Temple later moved to California, and both gained notoriety with the move of the Temple's headquarters to San Francisco in the mid-1970s. The incident in Guyana ranks among the largest mass suicides in history, and was the single greatest loss of American civilian life in a non-natural disaster until the events of Sep 11, 2001.

Now you may have heard about the all-too-familiar technique of the foot-in-the-door. Escalation is perpetuating. Once a small commitment is made, it sets the stage for ever-increasing commitments. The behavior needs to be justified, so attitudes are changed; this change in attitudes influences future decisions and behavior. Suppose you would like to enlist someone's aid in a massive undertaking, but you know the job you have in mind for the person is so difficult, and will require so much time and effort, that the person will surely decline. What do you do? You may get the person involved in much smaller aspects of the job, ones so easy that s/he wouldn't dream of turning down. Such serves to commit the individual to the "cause." Once people are thus committed, the likelihood of their complying with the larger request increases.

Jim Jones extracted great trust from his followers one step at a time. There was a chain of ever-increasing commitments on the part of his followers. Once a small commitment is made, the stage is set for ever-increasing commitments. It's easy to understand how a charismatic leader like Jones might extract money from his church's members. Once they have committed themselves to donating a small amount in response to his message of peace and universal brotherhood, he's able to request and receive a great deal more. Next, he induces people to sell their homes and turn over the money to the church. Soon, at his request, several of his followers pull up stakes, leaving their families and friends, to start life anew in the strange and difficult environment of Guyana. There, not only do they work hard (thus increasing their commitment), but they also are cut off from potential dissenting opinion, inasmuch as they are surrounded by true believers.

Jones takes sexual liberties with several married women among his followers, who acquiesce, but reluctantly; Jones claims to be the father of their children. He had sexual relations with his men followers as well, and made them believe they were all homosexuals, while he was the only heterosexual. Finally, as a prelude to the climactic event, Jones induces his followers to perform a series of mock ritual suicides as a test of their loyalty and obedience. Thus, in a step-by-step fashion, the commitment to Jones increases. Each step in itself is not a huge, ludicrous leap from the one preceding it.


linoleum - this guy must have really been something - I mean, looks like he's using a "method" where every prior little commitment made on the part of his followers, also serves as an actual "buffer" to any subsequent and still-persisting resistance to the irrational actions he eventually orders his followers to do.



Somebody please explain to me this "BUFFER" thing, that becka talks about!
Title: Re: Reality Construction - Making Enemies Out Of
Post by: copain on March 30, 2012, 02:36:22 PM
Quote

Following on from Bion's experiences in groups, Elliott Jaques and Isabel Menzies Lyth conducted research in various organizations and found the same mechanisms at work, with the defences embodied in the mores and structures of the institutions. I believe that this model is at work in innumerable situations -- neighborhood gang, school, workplace, country club, religion, racial, political and international conflict. When one comes into contact with the group, subculture or institution, the psychic price of admission is to enter into that group's splits and projective identifications.

In her classical paper on "The Function of Social Systems as a Defence Against Anxiety," Menzies Lyth describes the link as it applies to student nurses: "[...] I have used the term "social defence system" as a construct to describe certain features of the nursing service as a continuing social institution, I wish to make it clear that I do not imply that the nursing service as an institution operates the defences. Defences are, and can be, operated only by individuals. Their behavior is the link between their psychic defences and the institution'. There is a complex and subtle interaction, resulting in a matching between the individual's defences and the institution's. The processes 'depend heavily on repeated projection of the psychic defence system into the social defence system and repeated introjection of the social defence system into the psychic defence system. This allows continuous testing of the match and fit as the individual experiences his own and other people's reactions.

'The social defence system of the nursing service has been described as a historical development through collusive interaction between individuals to project and reify relevant elements of their psychic defence systems. However, from the viewpoint of the new entrant to the nursing service, the social defence system at the time of entry is a datum, an aspect of external reality to which she must react and adapt. Fenichel [...] states that social institutions arise through the efforts of human beings to satisfy their needs, but that social institutions then become external realities comparatively independent of individuals which affect the structure of the individual. The student nurse has to adapt her defences to those of the institution.

The latter are relatively immutable, so she shapes hers until they are congruent with the institution's. [...] Thus, the individual cannot bring the content of the phantasy anxiety situations into effective contact with reality. Unrealistic or pathological anxiety cannot be differentiated from realistic anxiety arising from real dangers. Therefore, anxiety tends to remain permanently at a level determined more by the phantasies than by the reality. The forced introjection of the hospital defence system, therefore, perpetuates in the individual a considerable degree of pathological anxiety.

[...] Crucial to understand how a person comes to think and feel like a racist or a virulent nationalist or a member of a street gang or a religious or psychoanalytic sect. The mechanisms are the same and that the process of taking in the values as 'a given', adapting one's own primitive anxieties to that group's particular version of splitting, projection, stereotyping and scapegoating, leads to the same kind of impoverishment that nurses experience -- of the ability to think and feel with moderation and to deal with reality and anxiety.

It is projected into the structure or the Other and given back -- not detoxified, but -- as an injunction to behave inhumanely toward patients, Lacanians, Jews, Armenians, 'the Evil Empire' or whomsoever. It is by this means that we became certain, without thinking about it or meeting many, if any, of the people involved, that Germans are sadistic, Japanese cunning, Italians sexist, Mexicans lazy, French romantic, English decent, Scots dour, Canadians boring, Swiss efficient, Dutch tidy, Scandinavians cold, Spaniards romantic, Russians passionate, Turks depraved, Arabs fanatical, Jews avaricious, Hawaiians friendly, Australians gauche, Chinese inscrutable, Africans rhythmic, White South Africans racist and authoritarian. We have been sure of all these things all our conscious lives, but we do not recall learning any of them.

We are dealing with a whole new level of grip. It's done with superglue -- cemented or bonded with the most primitive level of feeling that we have. [...] Members do it with projective identification.' Members of families, couples, groups, institutions, tribes, cultures and so on. [...] What is true of worms served up as food for birds is also true of people with respect to prejudices and other deeply held beliefs. They become so deeply implanted or sedimented that they are 'second nature'. [...] First we project our destructiveness into others; then we wish to annihilate them without guilt because they contain all the evil and destructiveness. When we read accounts of the genocide of the Conquistadors, the Stalinists, the Germans, the Kampucheans, the Americans or the Iraqis, we must ask what has been projected into these people from the most primitive parts of their tormentors. [...]

[...] What is being a fan of a movie star or a groupie of a rock star other than romantic, idealizing projective identification? Where positive aspects of the self are forcefully projected similar degrees of depersonalization occur, with feelings of personal worthlessness and with dependent worship of the other's contrasting strengths, powers, uncanny sensitivity, marvellous gifts, thoughts, knowledge, undying goodness etc. This is the world of the devotee, cults and hero-promotion.

It is also a world in which people will do anything a Bagwan or a Rev. James Jones tells them to do -- from sexual license to mass suicide. The same suspension of one's own sense of right and wrong is at work in the followers L. Ron Hubbard in the Church of Scientology as in the minds of the devotees of Charles Manson, killing rich Californians, and in the convictions of bombers and perpetrators of sectarian murders in Northern Ireland or terrorists from Lybia, though the ideologies of the respective group leaders may have utterly different apparent of real justifications.

http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/index.php?topic=3002012.msg5398666#msg5398666



Pobis, I'd add that it's not only that certain groups of people might appear as enemies just because how the people in power operating on a group level are "set up," so to speak - or perhaps it would be more appropriate to say that the way they are set up makes them engage in "realities' constructions" that leads to the artificial creation of a powerful and dangerous enemy that threatens the social fabric. Laws are directed against this enemy, labels to describe this enemy are promulgated and disseminated via the mass media, people are divided into us and them, for us or against us.

To imbue this purported enemy with sufficient substance to render the presumed threat credible, the police or the military target groups most likely to be perceived by the general population as enemies, such as ethnic or religious minorities or political dissidents. If such groups happen to include violent insurgents or separatists at their radical fringe, so much the better, since the threat will be more easily depicted as real. But this is not always necessary in the business of constructing reality: mere change is violence to the status quo and so, in the eyes of the power holders, peaceful advocacy and non-violent dissent can be perceived—and therefore depicted to others — as violence, per se.

During the so-called 'Dirty War' in Argentina, for example, the net of subversion was drawn so wide as to include Marxism, Zionism, Freemasonry and Progressive Catholicism, as well as human rights, women's rights and peace groups. But it did not stop there: it also included ‘indirect aggression’, which embraced everything from drug and alcohol abuse, political and economic liberalism, lay education and trade union corruption, to social and sexual deviance, the media and the creative arts.

In a closed society, where the state controls most, if not all, political, social and cultural institutions, the torture reality can be so pervasive as to constitute essentially the sole reality available, except in those undergrounds that any resistance movement manages to create and sustain. This would be the case for Nazi Germany, where a virulent brand of 'eliminationist' antisemitism removed Jews from the orbit of conventional morality.
Title: Re: Buffers
Post by: les protagonistes on April 01, 2012, 03:31:51 PM
Quote

Quote
Quote

To be sure, Marcuse worked with Freud's Eros only, disregarding Thanatos - as far as engaging in war and being aggressive "consciously," there's nothing strange or unusual about it (think soldiers in war) - what was being discussed here, I believe, was whether Thanatos is to be called an "instinct" or not ..


So if I get this right, this means killing others (murder) in order not to kill ourselves (suicide) in order to keep up with lack of life meaning and the conscious awareness of our deaths?

And that the deaths of the "other" serves to establish a symbolic immortality buffer for one of the parties? Kind of like the child that is forced to concede its physicality and "trade it in" for a symbolic sense of self (i.e., self-esteem)?


Quote


I researched a bit where does all this TMT thing comes from - it looks like from existential philosophers like Sartre, Camus and the like. Now, I have not read Sartre/Camus - I simply came upon a piece quoted by one of your fellow posters on this board. Take a look at it and draw your own judgment, as to whether such a piece deserves being printed (in book form) or not - maybe it's just me, but I find it very odd to read about a guy who "feels his mouth full of his tongue" - I am sure he's missing something - and truth-be-told, in the "hood" where I live, he'd get that right advice off-prompt, if yanno what I mean!

Quote

Existence is undoubtedly problematic and disturbing. In one weekend strip, in Sartre's "Peanuts," Schulz succinctly describes the horror of discovering one's own existence in the world:

Quote
Linus: I'm aware of my tongue ... It's an awful feeling! Every now and then I become aware that I have a tongue inside my mouth, and then it starts to feel lumped up ... I can't help it ... I can't put it out of my mind ... I keep thinking about where my tongue would be if I weren't thinking about it, and then I can feel it sort of pressing against my teeth ...

Sartre devoted an entire book to this experience – his 1938 novel "Nausea" in which his character Roquentin is alarmed to discover his own actuality. But Linus sums the point up very well in a few frames.


malachovsky, I understand your approach and sense of practicality you're bringing here - but if you stay alone and do not socialize with other people - as it is the case with lonely people like philosophers - it's not surprising that similar thoughts will come to your mind.

Now, it's never occurred to me, but I am sure it has to other people - Sartre, being on the record, on this kind of thing.

[...]


Flatbush - you've got to be kidding me!

http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/index.php?topic=3005465.msg5399590#msg5399590


Lefka, I've heard about this kind of thing, the Buffers, the buffer against the death anxiety we deal with on a daily basis.
Title: Buffers
Post by: les protagonistes on April 01, 2012, 03:41:53 PM
Quote

Quote
Quote

To be sure, Marcuse worked with Freud's Eros only, disregarding Thanatos - as far as engaging in war and being aggressive "consciously," there's nothing strange or unusual about it (think soldiers in war) - what was being discussed here, I believe, was whether Thanatos is to be called an "instinct" or not ..


So if I get this right, this means killing others (murder) in order not to kill ourselves (suicide) in order to keep up with lack of life meaning and the conscious awareness of our deaths?

And that the deaths of the "other" serves to establish a symbolic immortality buffer for one of the parties? Kind of like the child that is forced to concede its physicality and "trade it in" for a symbolic sense of self (i.e., self-esteem)?


Quote


I researched a bit where does all this TMT thing comes from - it looks like from existential philosophers like Sartre, Camus and the like. Now, I have not read Sartre/Camus - I simply came upon a piece quoted by one of your fellow posters on this board. Take a look at it and draw your own judgment, as to whether such a piece deserves being printed (in book form) or not - maybe it's just me, but I find it very odd to read about a guy who "feels his mouth full of his tongue" - I am sure he's missing something - and truth-be-told, in the "hood" where I live, he'd get that right advice off-prompt, if yanno what I mean!

Quote

Existence is undoubtedly problematic and disturbing. In one weekend strip, in Sartre's "Peanuts," Schulz succinctly describes the horror of discovering one's own existence in the world:

Quote
Linus: I'm aware of my tongue ... It's an awful feeling! Every now and then I become aware that I have a tongue inside my mouth, and then it starts to feel lumped up ... I can't help it ... I can't put it out of my mind ... I keep thinking about where my tongue would be if I weren't thinking about it, and then I can feel it sort of pressing against my teeth ...

Sartre devoted an entire book to this experience – his 1938 novel "Nausea" in which his character Roquentin is alarmed to discover his own actuality. But Linus sums the point up very well in a few frames.


malachovsky, I understand your approach and sense of practicality you're bringing here - but if you stay alone and do not socialize with other people - as it is the case with lonely people like philosophers - it's not surprising that similar thoughts will come to your mind.

Now, it's never occurred to me, but I am sure it has to other people - Sartre, being on the record, on this kind of thing.

[...]


Flatbush - you've got to be kidding me!

http://www.lawschooldiscussion.org/index.php?topic=3005465.msg5399590#msg5399590


Lefka, I've heard about this kind of thing, the Buffers, the buffer against the death anxiety we deal with on a daily basis.