Law School Discussion

LSAT Preparation => Studying for the LSAT => Topic started by: MiaTang on January 04, 2012, 12:39:03 AM

Title: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: MiaTang on January 04, 2012, 12:39:03 AM
I am entering college in 2012 fall and long to become a law school student for graduate school. I am planning to major in International Relations or Political Science in a women's college (admission results are coming out in March), such as Mount Holyoke, Smith or Bryn Mawr College.

I know it is definitely too early for me to do legitimate LSAT prep, but I want to know what type of course I should choose to benefit my college education in preparation for law school and the LSAT test? Or, anyone has good advice for starters?? Thanks!! 
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jeffort on January 04, 2012, 03:30:13 AM
Certainly do not start working LSAT materials for a few years.  Your main academic priority should be earning and maintaining a high GPA.

For law school admissions your undergraduate major does not really matter unless it is something really easy and non-academic along the lines of arts and crafts, horticulture, pottery, etc., but your GPA does matter a lot.  Do not select your UG major and classes based on what you think law school admission committees might favor. They seek to put together classes of people from diverse backgrounds that have performed well in prior academic settings.

Pick a major that you are interested in.  You should explore the options to find the one that is the best fit for you.

Regarding specific undergraduate classes that may help you be better prepared for the LSAT several years from now when you take it, basic statistics classes and basic logic/philosophy (NOT symbolic logic!) classes would help.  Those classes teach the fundamentals of valid methods of logical and analytical reasoning and the many common flawed methods of reasoning that are the bread and butter of what many LSAT questions (especially in the LR sections) revolve around. 

LSAT questions are designed to test reasoning skills/abilities with fairly basic logical concepts as well as English reading comprehension/grammar/vocabulary skills. 

Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: IClawstud on January 04, 2012, 06:51:14 PM
concurring: I would definitely make sure you take classes you enjoy and are easy for you. You seem like a conscientious person and when you need to get the LSATs taken care of you will. (Probably starting spring semester of Junior year.) In the mean time I suggest taking classes in your first year and a half that you can pull strong grades in to get acclimated to college. Than take some academically challenging classes which you find enjoyable as well.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: MissMelissRoths03 on January 11, 2012, 12:56:44 PM
I agree. Many students make the mistake of stressing about the LSAT before they should. Focus on your GPA and involvement on campus. Start preparing the summer before or fall of your junior year at the earliest.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Julie Fern on January 16, 2012, 03:10:02 PM
yes. stress about any republican as president instead.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: fortook on January 20, 2012, 02:20:21 PM
Check out Law School Undercover:  The author purports to be an ex law school admission person.  He/she argues for Econ, for a variety of reasons.

I know Econ and Math majors perform best statistically on the LSAT, and ironically prelaw people are among the worst performers.  When I was in undergrad my college's valedictorian was a double major in Math and History and was being specifically groomed for law school.  I don't know where she ended up going, but I'd bet it was a top 14.

This isn't and ad, btw, I don't work for the publisher or anything.  I wish I had asked your question when I was in undergrad.  Good luck.

P.S.- there won't be a repub president.  Their present bests are pretty bad.  Newt? Really? Do they remember that guy?
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: SaraJean on January 24, 2012, 08:52:21 AM
I know it is definitely too early for me to do legitimate LSAT prep, but I want to know what type of course I should choose to benefit my college education in preparation for law school and the LSAT test? Or, anyone has good advice for starters?? Thanks!!
Classes in logic would be helpful, and some undergrad institutions allow students to take them to fulfill a math requirement.  I liked math, so I took the math classes.  My LSAT prep books were my introduction to formal logic.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: fortook on January 25, 2012, 09:39:29 PM
^^^ An ad.  An ad for useless crap, no less.  If you can't use a watch to keep time, you have bigger problems than a looming LSAT. 20 bucks for a fancy timer- utter insanity.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jhuen_the_bird on February 14, 2012, 10:25:32 AM
I'm a 2010 law school grad and currently a lawyer.  I would advise you major in something more useful like business/Economics or science or engineering.  This will give you an edge on the job market after law school ... The job market for lawyers is currently dismal.  I'm a very optimistic person, and even I can admit that.  It doesn't look like its getting better, so you shouldn't count on that (but it would be awesome if things improved!)   Also, if you have an engineering or hard science background, you can do patent law / ip which is in higher demand.

I'd recommend minoring in English or philosophy (or just taking courses) to get the edge for writing / reading and the LSAT.  Also, a foreign language, especially Chinese could be helpful.


Oh and also... Make sure it's your dream to be a lawyer and not a law student.  While I enjoyed law school, 3 years is fleeting, and then you have to be a lawyer ... Which is often really different than what ppl think it is.  Also, do research on the law school scam and the state of the legal economy so you know what you're getting into.  And know that document review jobs are what new lawyers today are fighting for in ost places, as sad as that may seem.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jeffort on February 14, 2012, 01:54:04 PM
I'm a 2010 law school grad and currently a lawyer.  I would advise you major in something more useful like business/Economics or science or engineering.  This will give you an edge on the job market after law school ... The job market for lawyers is currently dismal.  I'm a very optimistic person, and even I can admit that.  It doesn't look like its getting better, so you shouldn't count on that (but it would be awesome if things improved!)   Also, if you have an engineering or hard science background, you can do patent law / ip which is in higher demand.

I'd recommend minoring in English or philosophy (or just taking courses) to get the edge for writing / reading and the LSAT.  Also, a foreign language, especially Chinese could be helpful.


Oh and also... Make sure it's your dream to be a lawyer and not a law student.  While I enjoyed law school, 3 years is fleeting, and then you have to be a lawyer ... Which is often really different than what ppl think it is.  Also, do research on the law school scam and the state of the legal economy so you know what you're getting into.  And know that document review jobs are what new lawyers today are fighting for in ost places, as sad as that may seem.

(http://www.lsatdiscussion.com/Smileys/default/goodpost.gif)

I pretty much agree with almost all of it since it's good realistic advice that matches up with the current state of affairs.

The part I must caution about is choosing a hard science major such as engineering, chemistry, biology bio-tech, etc. if one is not really interested in the field and willing to put in a lot of hard work in the associated classes. 

The classes are tough and very demanding.  They will rip apart your GPA and sink your brain as fast as Seal Team Six pulled Osama Bin Ladens brain out the back of his head and sank him in the ocean if you are not interested in the classes and consequently don't do the homework because you hate the classes/subjects and homework load involved.

If you are into hard sciences/engineering/bio-tech/etc., it is a great way to set a path to become a patent lawyer or a lawyer that deals with patent and science issues related litigation.  There is still a steady demand for lawyers of that type that are armed with specialized knowledge.

Also, don't do a drama major or some other similar --free/easy A's for everyone-- not very academic/very little reading involved major of the type that are meant for people who want to be actors/artists/musicians/famous entertainers/etc.  Law school admission committees at good schools will likely just laugh a bit when they read the application and then put it in the denied stack unless you have a top notch LSAT score, GPA and compelling soft factors that show you can and will be a book worm that is cool with spending a lot of time reading and writing.

Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jhuen_the_bird on February 15, 2012, 09:18:30 AM
I definitely agree that if you will fail miserably at a science or engineering major not to do it.  I majored in English and did a minor in Spanish and Philosophy.  I wish I'd worked harder at Spanish and then kept up my skills during law school.  I also should have done a minor or double major in a business degree.  It would have given me an edge and some know-how that I don't have now.  I also could have done a jd/MBA at the same time which maybe could have opened up additional non-lawyer jobs.

I do want to emphasize that it is rough out there.  Since graduating, I took and passed the bar, continued to work as a law clerk in a small firm who couldn't hire me as an attorney, did a fellowship with my city in the general counsel section, got an of counsel position with a national bad shitlaw debt settlement firm, did appearances for collections and other firms, practiced on my own in domestic relations (extremely difficult since I am a new attorney with no experience), did some work for solo practitioners, did contract doc review work, and FINALLY last fall, through luck, good timing, and perseverance landed a staff attorney position with a BIGLAW firm where I am working now.

Although a majority of my job now is doc review, I feel incredibly blessed and happy, bc the pay is good and the job is relatively secure.  I'm hoping that this job will at least give me connections or make me look more desirable since it's a big and well known firm.  I wouldn't mind continuing working in ediscovery, personally, but I know this would be a nightmare for many would be law students, current students, and current lawyers.

Also, even though it took so much work and fumbling around from one legal opportunity to another, I am a lot luckier than most of my law school peers (or at least in an equal position).

It takes a lot of moxie to be a new lawyer in this economy!
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: jiurte on February 16, 2012, 10:02:06 AM
Kindly share some views about the after Law School (http://www.sheehan-law.com) if someone want to do practice for legal matters where he or she can do that.?
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jhuen_the_bird on February 16, 2012, 10:49:41 AM
Kindly share some views about the after Law School (http://www.sheehan-law.com) if someone want to do practice for legal matters where he or she can do that.?

Sorry, this is a bit incoherent and I don't understand the question...
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jeffort on February 17, 2012, 01:58:25 PM
Kindly share some views about the after Law School (http://www.sheehan-law.com) if someone want to do practice for legal matters where he or she can do that.?

Sorry, this is a bit incoherent and I don't understand the question...

It's probably a post from one of the paid to post on your board services that Andrew, the owner of this site, hired to revive discussion and traffic on the board.  Many of those services, especially the really cheap ones, are located overseas so their English, understanding of the LSAT and North America legal systems can be pretty bad. 

Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jhuen_the_bird on February 17, 2012, 05:06:12 PM
Kindly share some views about the after Law School (http://www.sheehan-law.com) if someone want to do practice for legal matters where he or she can do that.?

Sorry, this is a bit incoherent and I don't understand the question...

It's probably a post from one of the paid to post on your board services that Andrew, the owner of this site, hired to revive discussion and traffic on the board.  Many of those services, especially the really cheap ones, are located overseas so their English, understanding of the LSAT and North America legal systems can be pretty bad.

Wait, they HIRED people to increase discussion on lawschooldiscussion.org?  This makes me really sad, actually ... this board was thriving out of control back in 2006 when I was applying for law school :(
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jeffort on February 17, 2012, 10:31:31 PM
Kindly share some views about the after Law School (http://www.sheehan-law.com) if someone want to do practice for legal matters where he or she can do that.?

Sorry, this is a bit incoherent and I don't understand the question...

It's probably a post from one of the paid to post on your board services that Andrew, the owner of this site, hired to revive discussion and traffic on the board.  Many of those services, especially the really cheap ones, are located overseas so their English, understanding of the LSAT and North America legal systems can be pretty bad.

Wait, they HIRED people to increase discussion on lawschooldiscussion.org?  This makes me really sad, actually ... this board was thriving out of control back in 2006 when I was applying for law school :(

It's sad but it's true.  I joined here in 2006 as well and it was a thriving community back then with a lot of good advice, tons of good regular posters, many active threads, etc.  It started devolving into becoming basically a desert roughly three years ago and has spiraled down in a slow painful nose-dive over that time. 

I believe one of the main causes has been the technical problems and the board frequently going down for days because Andrew wasn't paying attention and took a while to notice and get around to fixing things.  During the down times people migrated over to TLS.

There is a big cottage industry of sites/people that will post for pay or for bartered reciprocal posting on other forums. Part of the driving force is ad revenue. The more activity/posts/views, the more ad $$ the site owner passively earns.

Here is just one of many examples: http://forumpromotion.net/forum/viewforum.php?f=6

Oh well, the glory days of LSD are over, at least for now, and it makes me sad. (http://www.lsatdiscussion.com/Smileys/default/crying.gif)
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: IrrX on February 18, 2012, 01:20:21 AM
Added hilarity from a minimum post count on the company's forums before you can apply for a job. :D
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: fortook on February 18, 2012, 10:52:12 AM
More sadness: TLS is moderated by a few serious deuch.bags.  Populated by less duchy, but still slightly mean people who make them selves feel better by putting others down. 

Might not seem I feel that way with the meanness of some of my post on LSD, but TLS is too harsh for even me and I'm probably not the only person that feels this way- a small glimmer of hope for LSD, TLS is a creepy stereotypically arrogantly mean law student forum (inferiority complexes get old).
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: IrrX on February 18, 2012, 09:11:28 PM
If TLS is too harsh for you, you'll definitely want to steer clear of AutoAdmit/XOXOHTH.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jeffort on February 18, 2012, 10:30:13 PM
More sadness: TLS is moderated by a few serious deuch.bags.  Populated by less duchy, but still slightly mean people who make them selves feel better by putting others down. 

Might not seem I feel that way with the meanness of some of my post on LSD, but TLS is too harsh for even me and I'm probably not the only person that feels this way- a small glimmer of hope for LSD, TLS is a creepy stereotypically arrogantly mean law student forum (inferiority complexes get old).

I agree for the most part with your observations. 

I got temporarily banned by one of the TLS moderators the other week for posting something totally benign in a thread a mod decided to censor, told people to stop posting in, but did not simply just lock. 

EarlCat, a friend of mine, LSAT expert, etc. that has also been posting great advice for free here, on TLS, and on other boards for years also got temporarily banned for posting in the same TLS thread with a civilized criticism of a few things and posing a few questions.  A number of other posters that regularly post quality advice for free that are not promoting/selling a product also got banned in that draconian ban wave. 

It really pissed me off because I only post helpful advice and answers to students questions there when I have the time, having been doing so for several years, and do not engage in immature $hit slinging nonsense. 

IMHO, the TLS mods did it to protect a certain guy that recently started his own online LSAT prep business that they are letting advertise/promote for free on the site directly and with shill accounts in threads rather than requiring him to pay for banner ads like all the other prep companies are required to do.

If people believe the practice test and test day score claims of all or most TLS users that post on that LSAT study board, then most or almost all of the one percent of test takers that actually score 173 and above have accounts and post there.  That is an unrealistic scenario.

There are some decent regulars that are helpful and semi-humble in the mix, but they are the minority.  When I post there, if I don't get called a feminine hygiene product-bag by somebody at least once every few weeks for just giving straight up facts/information/honest answers to questions, I feel like I'm doing something wrong!

Oh well, what can you do to stop some people from being arrogant a-holes? 
 
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: fortook on February 19, 2012, 12:02:00 AM
Just stop posting there. I got banned for no apparent reason (or mentioned, I even emailed and asked- no response)  by some fool mod with a pic of a Texan bringing down the gavel in hatred- seriously man, for real, an angry Texan- meh, someone feel small and weak?  Never went back after that.  I don't really have the desire to deal with d bags like that, I can remember high school and well, just don't want to relive that silliness.

Like I said, people with inferiority complexes are lame and it gets old- I will deal with them, often manipulatively, if I have to but never will I deal with them if I don't have to.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jhuen_the_bird on February 19, 2012, 07:18:20 AM
I checked out TLS out of curiosity, and it does seem somewhat of a douchey place ... whenever people would be even slightly bantering or disagreeing in a thread, a mod seems to have swooped in and "closed the thread down" or whatever.  How lame and unrealistic of real life.  They also seem to be in complete and utter denial of the state of the legal economy right now.  I hate to be a doom and gloom person, and I try to be positive, but it's rough out there and they all seem like "Oh ho ho ... that won't affect me b/c I'll be graduating from a T14 in the top of my class and the economy will be sunshine and rainbows in 3 years!" ... well, good luck with that.

I do miss posting / hanging out here back when it was booming!  There were a lot of people here who really helped me out in applying in '06 from just general advice / encouragement to actually picking apart my personal statement with me.  I'm glad I came before the fall, I guess!
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Henri_Allen on April 03, 2012, 10:02:32 AM
I am entering college in 2012 fall and long to become a law school student for graduate school. I am planning to major in International Relations or Political Science in a women's college (admission results are coming out in March), such as Mount Holyoke, Smith or Bryn Mawr College.

I know it is definitely too early for me to do legitimate LSAT prep, but I want to know what type of course I should choose to benefit my college education in preparation for law school and the LSAT test? Or, anyone has good advice for starters?? Thanks!!

Getting back to the original post, a lot of people have suggested Econ for an undergrad, but the bottom line is, if you aren't interested in Economics and aren't very good at math, you may really struggle to keep your GPA up. This will inevitably make your college experience terrible. You want to be able to enjoy this time. If you've got a legitimate interest in another field and feel that you will do well and enjoy the classes, go that route. In the long run, the job market will get better. So don't stress about that either. Enjoy yourself in the present while you keep one eye on your future!
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jeffort on April 03, 2012, 07:50:06 PM
I am entering college in 2012 fall and long to become a law school student for graduate school. I am planning to major in International Relations or Political Science in a women's college (admission results are coming out in March), such as Mount Holyoke, Smith or Bryn Mawr College.

I know it is definitely too early for me to do legitimate LSAT prep, but I want to know what type of course I should choose to benefit my college education in preparation for law school and the LSAT test? Or, anyone has good advice for starters?? Thanks!!

Getting back to the original post, a lot of people have suggested Econ for an undergrad, but the bottom line is, if you aren't interested in Economics and aren't very good at math, you may really struggle to keep your GPA up. This will inevitably make your college experience terrible. You want to be able to enjoy this time. If you've got a legitimate interest in another field and feel that you will do well and enjoy the classes, go that route. In the long run, the job market will get better. So don't stress about that either. Enjoy yourself in the present while you keep one eye on your future!

(http://www.lsatdiscussion.com/Smileys/default/iagree.gif)

It's important to choose an UG major that focuses on subjects you are interested in, otherwise you could end up miserable trying to get yourself to study subjects and topics you loath/don't care about, which will negatively impact your GPA. 

Also, when you select a major it is not a sealed in stone lifetime commitment you cannot back out of.  Many people change majors while in UG as they explore subjects and figure out what fits.  Plus, most schools also let you minor in something so you can get a broader education with exposure not limited to one particular field. 

Whichever major one goes with, to help be better be prepared for the LSAT and law school, it's a good idea to take a statistics class(es), basic logic/philosophy class(es) as well as English/humanities/language or other related classes that involve a lot of reading and writing. 

Law school and beyond involves reading a lot of dense text that is complex/sometimes cryptic as well as a lot of writing.  Best to get used to doing that while also enjoying several years in the non-real world cocoon of earning an UG degree and staying focused on keeping your GPA up.  Also, build up your vocabulary as you go.  Whenever you encounter a word you are unfamiliar with while reading something, look it up in the dictionary, perhaps even build a set of index cards with words you look up.  Write the word on one side, the definition on the other side, and go through them to quiz yourself from time to time.  It doesn't take much time to do that with flash cards as you go, a minute or two at most per word you come across and are uncertain about.  Get in the habit and the stack will build over time.  You can get little plastic index card holder boxes really cheap at office supply stores to keep them in. 

RE:  The TLS banning issue.  I got banned again over there again on Saturday night.  I do not understand their moderation philosophies, it doesn't seem to make sense or have a consistent rational basis. They apparently banned me for posting some publicly available facts (URL links to official registration databases available to the public by law and government entities) about a spammer in response to the guys spam thread advertising LSAT tutoring services that included the dudes real name.  The guy is a convicted registered sex offender that got busted for possession of child pornography.  I figured that information would be important to know for people considering handing over a bunch of $$ to spend private one-on-one LSAT tutoring time with the guy.  Apparently TLS moderators didn't agree and decided to protect a pervert and kick me, a long time poster giving free LSAT prep and law school advice on the boards out instead.  Go figure.  :-\

Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: fortook on April 04, 2012, 10:22:54 AM
Arg, please don't make me agree with TLS mods.  Banning should be used so rarely as to be closer to never rather than always, unless you're an angry kid moderating TLS of course.

However, what does his crim rec have to do with anything related to the LSAT?  Why would you care?  I want to make it my mission to remove those silly registries.  Value judging is too dangerous a human problem.  We know better than to facilitate it. 

P.S. I know I have to preemptively say: child porn is bad.  Deviant sex stuff is bad.  Not trying to justify the behavior, just saying its not a global indicator of everything (or very much at all for that matter).  We don't need to be the fool that sets someone up to fail then acts shocked when they fail. 

Signed,

Prostitute for life
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Julie Fern on April 04, 2012, 04:36:08 PM
I am entering college in 2012 fall and long to become a law school student for graduate school. I am planning to major in International Relations or Political Science in a women's college (admission results are coming out in March), such as Mount Holyoke, Smith or Bryn Mawr College.

I know it is definitely too early for me to do legitimate LSAT prep, but I want to know what type of course I should choose to benefit my college education in preparation for law school and the LSAT test? Or, anyone has good advice for starters?? Thanks!!

Getting back to the original post, a lot of people have suggested Econ for an undergrad, but the bottom line is, if you aren't interested in Economics and aren't very good at math, you may really struggle to keep your GPA up. This will inevitably make your college experience terrible. You want to be able to enjoy this time. If you've got a legitimate interest in another field and feel that you will do well and enjoy the classes, go that route. In the long run, the job market will get better. So don't stress about that either. Enjoy yourself in the present while you keep one eye on your future!

shame on you returning original topic.

that what wrong with america.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jeffort on April 04, 2012, 09:13:56 PM
Arg, please don't make me agree with TLS mods.  Banning should be used so rarely as to be closer to never rather than always, unless you're an angry kid moderating TLS of course.

However, what does his crim rec have to do with anything related to the LSAT?  Why would you care?  I want to make it my mission to remove those silly registries.  Value judging is too dangerous a human problem.  We know better than to facilitate it. 

P.S. I know I have to preemptively say: child porn is bad.  Deviant sex stuff is bad.  Not trying to justify the behavior, just saying its not a global indicator of everything (or very much at all for that matter).  We don't need to be the fool that sets someone up to fail then acts shocked when they fail. 

Signed,

Prostitute for life

In case you misunderstood.  I did not out the guys real name.  He posted with it as well as a link with his full name and pictures of himself.  That is what I responded to on TLS. It was a spam thread the guy started to market his new LSAT prep business.

I didn't even have to do any research on the guy other than following the link he posted and then one google search with his name I did to see what his LSAT prep biz is about since I'm an LSAT tutor and the guy seemed new to the LSAT prep biz.

Others may disagree, but I believe that a caught and convicted sex offender, especially for child porn, has no business teaching anybody anything, at least not people that are unaware of the teachers prior 'bad acts'.  Child porn doesn't just randomly end up in a persons possession unintentionally (by cruising legal internet porn sites for instance), the person getting caught with it by the police, then prosecuted and convicted after judicial and prosecution scrutiny.  I think it's fair to assume it wasn't an instance of innocently cruising the internet, viewing some web pages/following a few links and some images from illegal sites getting stored in the cache on the hard drive. 

The information IS relevant to potential customers seeking to pay for one-on-one LSAT prep services and deciding who to hire in order to prepare to get into the legal field, which, in order to function properly and fairly, relies a lot on the character, ethics, integrity and morality of the participants. 

That's my view and it will not change.
 
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: fortook on April 05, 2012, 06:49:22 AM
Meh, Those kind of wild generalizations is what's really wrong with America.  Sadly, the majority of people will relate to you void of the obvious logical holes.  Come on man, you're an LSAT tutor, you have to understand where I'm coming from.

Please explain again how his child porn case is in any way connected with the LSAT. Put another way, say you were using his sexual preferences or desires to make a global "character" based decision that connects unrelated things- like say condemning someone for gay sex used to determine if the person is good at math.

P.S. I am not condoning child porn.  Keep heart, I cannot win this argument either.  I'd have just a difficult time trying to explain how the mid east invasions are crusades (just replace "Christianity" with "democracy" and everything else fits, but now you see democracy is sacrosanct- which frickin strengthens the argument- arg).  Regardless of truth, you can't tell people thing the don't want to hear.  People want to think you can take a small piece of info and use the powers of induction to understand everything about a person, its stupid but its human.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jeffort on April 05, 2012, 12:46:28 PM
Meh, Those kind of wild generalizations is what's really wrong with America.  Sadly, the majority of people will relate to you void of the obvious logical holes.  Come on man, you're an LSAT tutor, you have to understand where I'm coming from.

Please explain again how his child porn case is in any way connected with the LSAT. Put another way, say you were using his sexual preferences or desires to make a global "character" based decision that connects unrelated things- like say condemning someone for gay sex used to determine if the person is good at math.

P.S. I am not condoning child porn.  Keep heart, I cannot win this argument either.  I'd have just a difficult time trying to explain how the mid east invasions are crusades (just replace "Christianity" with "democracy" and everything else fits, but now you see democracy is sacrosanct- which frickin strengthens the argument- arg).  Regardless of truth, you can't tell people thing the don't want to hear.  People want to think you can take a small piece of info and use the powers of induction to understand everything about a person, its stupid but its human.

I disagree that I made any wild generalizations.  Please point out the logical holes you see. 

We are not discussing a closed universe LSAT LR argument where you can only reason in and infer things from the few sentences presented and are not allowed to bring in outside knowledge except for common sense and basic pedestrian/warranted assumptions about the topic of the argument.

It's a matter of character, previous behavior and possible future behavior that can be seriously harmful to young people that get victimized.   

Haven't you watched any of the many Dateline "To Catch a Predator" episodes?  They produced tons of them.  Those alone, and I'm not basing my judgment simply on that show, contain mountains of evidence which demonstrate that people who desire and seek to obtain sexual gratification from underage children (in whatever form, in person, with pictures, videos, online chats, etc.) have super high recidivism rate and frequently cannot resist their urges to do it again, even when they know it is wrong and that they may be caught again and locked up.

Beyond the Dateline series, there are mountains of peer reviewed studies about sex offenders that contain many verified statistics and well done research from law enforcement agencies and respected academics that have focused on studying the problem.

One of the well held conclusions that has even been agreed to be true by many repeat convicted offenders is that there is no cure, and that people with pedophilia sexual desires keep having the strong urges to seek gratification and do it again even though they know they are risking serious prison time and that it is wrong.  Basically, they cannot help themselves with the urges and desires to get off that way.

So, to connect the dots of relevance, the question is simple. 

Should a documented caught and convicted guy with proven deviant sexual desires that according to science and research he will continue to have and may again act on be teaching/tutoring young impressionable people one-on-one in private without them knowing about his predisposition before agreeing to hire the guy as their teacher? 

It doesn't matter how well he knows the LSAT and the logic it tests.  I'm sure many serial killers, child molesters, mobsters and other types of criminals that have hurt people in serious ways are experts at all sorts of things they could teach others about.  Does that make it ok for them to be allowed to teach students without their informed consent and knowledge of the character and serious criminal behavior patterns/history of the teacher and possible risks getting involved with and interacting with that teacher and type of person carry along?  I say NOOOOO!

If the dude discloses it up front and some people are willing to hire him and trust him, then that is fine with me.  Take your own risk.  My main focus is on disclosure, especially in this context with young impressionable people seeking a good teacher/tutor to spend time and work with in person. It sucks, but in reality there are bad people out there in the world that do bad things to other people they try to hide while frequently putting forward a 'nice guy next door' public persona.  There are many very strong legitimate reasons behind the lifetime sex offender registry laws and freely accessible/searchable public databases/registries. 

Think about this question: 
As a mother or father, if your child wants to go to law school and asks you to pay for a private tutor, while sorting through the many options available, would you opt to hand over a lot of $$ to a guy you knew had already committed a very serious sexual offense crime and let your child spend time with and be taught by that person in private one-on-one sessions? 


Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: fortook on April 06, 2012, 12:35:23 PM
Logical hole- child porn conviction = bad person = bad at LSAT prep = you better person = you good at LAST prep = go pay for your services.

You can't use logic then say, "think about it as a parent"- emotional generalization. Arg.

To Catch A Predator was wrong on so many levels. Are you really using that to infer (note not deduce) how the world is?

I'm not saying child porn is good, just that its unrelated to your criticism without unacceptable generalization.

If you say to me: Hitler was a cannibal. And I say, Nope he was a vegetarian.  Am I defending Hitler by pointing out you are wrong on the facts.   Holocaust murderer does not = cannibal.

"Character" is so wild and varying a concept as to not exist.  There are people that think Hitler had "good character".
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Julie Fern on April 06, 2012, 12:51:00 PM
wait:  hitler vegatarian?  that change everything.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: fortook on April 06, 2012, 01:24:29 PM
Murder good, meat bad?
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Julie Fern on April 06, 2012, 03:32:27 PM
no.  it explain moustache.
Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: Jeffort on April 06, 2012, 04:13:03 PM
Logical hole- child porn conviction = bad person = bad at LSAT prep = you better person = you good at LAST prep = go pay for your services.

You can't use logic then say, "think about it as a parent"- emotional generalization. Arg.

To Catch A Predator was wrong on so many levels. Are you really using that to infer (note not deduce) how the world is?

I'm not saying child porn is good, just that its unrelated to your criticism without unacceptable generalization.

If you say to me: Hitler was a cannibal. And I say, Nope he was a vegetarian.  Am I defending Hitler by pointing out you are wrong on the facts.   Holocaust murderer does not = cannibal.

"Character" is so wild and varying a concept as to not exist.  There are people that think Hitler had "good character".

Your logical hole chain at the top is not what I have said. 

I never said that because he is a sex offender deviant he doesn't know how to teach/tutor the LSAT, that was never an issue. He could know the test very well, IDK.  Also, I'm not in competition with the guy.  You made the same false assumption somebody on TLS did.  I'm not a rival tutor competing with him for business from students.  He is on the east coast, I'm on the west coast almost 4000 miles away.

I'm not overgeneralizing.  It's been proven time and time again that almost all deviant sex offenders, especially ones with sexual desires towards children/underage adolescents re-offend even after having been caught before and knowing the serious consequences they face if caught again.  Many quality research studies have concluded, based on using sound statistical methods and data, interviews with convicts, etc., that almost all pedophilia type sex offenders have committed the crimes many times before getting caught and busted the first time, and continue to commit the crimes many times again after first conviction. 

It's not a wild generalization to assume that there is a high probability that a caught and convicted pedophilia type sex offender will be tempted to and do it again.  This isn't the type of crime a person that is willing to and intentionally does it commits just once. 

Would you believe a defense such as "oh golly your honor, I had bad judgment that day and made the mistake of seeking and obtaining child porn just to see what it was like on a whim and happened to get caught with it that one and only time.  Sorry, never done it before, I promise I'll never do it again." ??

That type of defense/position goes against known facts and reality.  It's probably pretty hard to find child porn given that it is illegal and morally repugnant, so a person would have to intentionally put in effort and affirmative actions to obtain it in the first place with specific intent and a desire to want it and get it, then would have to have done something bad to be detected and caught by law enforcement with it. 

My question about if you are a parent is not an emotional generalization, it's about risk assessment and protecting a child/young impressionable person from potential danger/risky circumstances. 

Since the guy had the urge to do it and did it at least once in a way that he got caught and convicted for, it's logical to assume there is a level of probability that he will do it again given the opportunity. 

Many pedophiles and sexual predators seek out positions of authority where they have access to young people, such as being a teacher, where they are supposed to be trusted by the younger person and the student is expected to be obedient to the adult.  The perverts that do this sometimes exploit that power/authority role over young people to have their way with one or some of them for gratification of their deviant urges. 

The logical quality and credibility of your reasoning and positions are seriously put in doubt by your statement about the concept of character (acceptable moral character is what we are talking about), being so wild as to not exist.  It does exist and there are widely established and agreed upon by society moral standards that relate to character.  Sure there are some behaviors that people disagree about in terms of whether it is of good or bad moral character, such as smoking pot, but there are many acts and behaviors fairly universally agreed upon to be of bad moral character by civilized society, one of them being pedophilia.   

Title: Re: Sincere Inquiry from a Starter
Post by: fortook on April 06, 2012, 05:20:09 PM
You seem to know an awful lot about most people.  You must have good character.  Take note: child porn is bad. Got it. You do not need to argue against child porn.  I tried to avoid this avenue, but here we are.  And here I am, unsurprised. 

You really can't see the huge global generalizations you are making?  Really? Really?

For Good Friday I ask: can anyone ever be forgiven?  Can the child porn guy ever get out from under it? Ever? Or for the rest of his life does he have to deal with the contempt of everyone- publicized by the registry?  We all know the answer is no because there are too many idiots in the human population that hate so easily and absolutely.

I'm not saying he's a great guy, just that the issues are unrelated.  Incidentally, is it possible he is a great guy?  Just slightly remotely possible?