No worries. The curve is pretty silly in my opinion as well.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - the white rabbit
@babylawyer: your original...
Well then you completely missed the point. I didn't say "a very smart person will do worse when the material is easy than when it is hard"; I said "On a forced curve, a very smart person will do worse when the material is easy than when it is hard." The curve in combination with the easy material makes law school difficult by introducing a greater element of random chance than there would be if the material were hard or if there were no curve.
Also, that wasn't a premise. The premises was actually that on an easy test, there is less of an opportunity for a smart person to show her superiority than there is on a hard test. Do you disagree with that?
I don't need any world views or unfounded statements to know how I will perform compared to your inaccurate data, Babylawyer. Show me the studies/statistics of smarter students doing more poorly on easier subjects than harder subjects... If you give me your own perception based off what you have seen that is simply a compositional error in logic.
What do you think is the error in my logic? If you're well ahead of everyone else in terms of sheer brainpower, you would want a test on a forced curve to be as hard as possible, since that would provide you with more opportunities to show off your brainpower. Easier test means less opportunity to show off brainpower and higher probability of being mistaken for an average intellect. Seems to make perfect sense. What do you think I'm getting wrong?
« on: August 22, 2010, 02:20:26 AM »
Basicly not at all what I said, I said IF you make a lot then you don't have to worry about the debt since you'll have the money, but IF you end up making pennies then the income based payments and the 20 year forgivness step in and make it ok for you and if you suck bad with a JD you'd suck worse without it.
Say you end up making the same amount of money you did without the JD, but now you need to pay a percentage for the next 20 years to pay off your debt. Was law school still the right answer in that situation?
Your expected response: "That never happens because everybody knows that you make more money with a JD."
And if you think "...but I have a JD" is going to impress anybody, you may have bigger problems than I can help you with.
I am wondering why people believe law school is hard? I read some of the editions of books students read in law school and was thinking, "this is rather easy to not only grasp but remember as well." People are just making law school seem hard when it is actually like an undergrad history course. Grasp and retain most of the information and get an easy A. Try completing any mathematics beyond linear Algebra and applied mathematics and then tell me how hard it is to stay at an A average in law school.
On a forced curve, a very smart person will do worse when the material is easy than when it is hard. If the material is hard, the very smart person will understand more of it than her average classmates, and so will be at an advantage. If the material is easy, the very smart person will not understand much more of it than her average classmates, and so her advantage is lessened. On a forced curve, the lessened advantage translates into a lesser likelihood that the very smart person will be the one getting the top grade.
Also, we'll know what you mean if you just say math, and not mathematics.
« on: August 22, 2010, 01:21:48 AM »
Damn you must have failed economics.
A lot of noise in this post, but not much substance. Basically, you assume that it's easy to make money.
I don't understand why anyone would think that carrying an enormous amount of debt is no big deal, especially when it's not backed by anything that can be exchanged for value.
« on: July 30, 2010, 06:45:39 AM »
The sleazy part is tying recruiting efforts to tuition increases. Frankly, I think tuition should be frozen for everybody at the level where it was at matriculation.
That being said, I was planning on peppering basically all the top T-14 schools.
I think this is the right way to go. Maybe it's best to leave it at that.
I don't think undergrad school matters all that much.
HYS are worth applying to, though I think they're reaches.
CCN are high targets.
I don't think grade trend counts for all that much. And 3.5 isn't great for law school. Jamie Stringer's assessment isn't particularly harsh from what I can tell.