Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Show Posts

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 - Changed Name

Pages: 1 ... 70 71 72 73 74 [75] 76
741
I'll reply to the first one, and then I have to do something, if no one has responded to the second one, I'll look at it then..

So the first argument is basically this:

Some citizen is arguing that the law enforcement system is losing its ability to prevent violent crime because the number of murders committed has kept on rising year to year.

The city official dude is like "no way, man." Because the population is increasing, and yeah, there are more murders number-wise, but the actually percentage of murders has dropped.

We want to weaken the city official dude. Remember, he is countering the notion that the law enforcement system is losing its ability to prevent violent crime. He does not think this is the case because of the drop in percentage of murders.

TCR is saying that well, violent crimes haven't really dropped, it's just that healthcare is better and less people are dying. But if we think about it, if we didn't have this healthcare system than the murder percentage would be greatly higher. Therefore, violent crime is still happening and happening at a greater rate, it's just that people aren't dying as much...

Let me know if that helps..

742
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Confusing TCR
« on: October 19, 2007, 02:43:07 AM »
I really think it hinges on the word "substitute." The way it reads is that it is an equivalent switch. That the amount of demeaning work will still equal the same amount of demeaning work. I think that's where the crux of this lies.

743
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Confusing TCR
« on: October 19, 2007, 01:16:28 AM »
Hmm..okay... I'll try to defend the argument:

The guy's conclusion is that the Robots will not cause any change with regards to "demeaning" work. The creation of Robots will merely SUBSTITUTE one demeaning work for another. But his premise is only that maintaining these Robots IS demeaning work.

What's his assumption? He assumes that maintaining the Robots will create the same amount of demeaning work as it eliminates.

So the flaw (which is essentially just an assumption question) is that he fails to consider the possibility that these Robots will eliminate way more demeaning jobs than they create. Therefore, it really cannot be considered a "substitute." I think it all hinges on that word (substitute).

What do you think?

744
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Confusing TCR
« on: October 18, 2007, 10:17:26 PM »
One more thing: A lot of times these flaw questions will exhibit multiple flaws; however, if you don't see the flaw that you come up with in your head, I think you just have to go one by one and check to see if it makes sense. As I was reading the stimulus, I thought the flaw was the same thing you mentioned.

745
Studying for the LSAT / Re: Confusing TCR
« on: October 18, 2007, 10:08:20 PM »
Okay, I'll jump in to try and help you understand this from a different perspective.

The argument is basically saying that "Look, there's an illusion with this whole Robot-building stuff. Because, those who create Robots think that they will be doing us a great favor by reducing "hazardous and demeaning work." But they fail the recognize that the Robots, themselves, will need to be worked on. And that's "demeaning." Therefore, they're just simply replacing where we do the "demeaning" work."

Well, the flaw in this guy's argument is that yeah, we may have to fix the robots, and yes, it may be "demeaning," however, the created Robots may significantly lower the other demeaning jobs in the world, and the only demeaning jobs left are the ones where we maintain the Robots.

I'm sorry if that wasn't a clear explanation. But he's basically overlooking the possibility that the Robots can have a significant impact in reducing the "hazardous and demeaning work" even though they may cause a little work themselves.

Let me know if that helps..

746
Where should I go next fall? / Re: W&L 1L Taking Questions
« on: October 10, 2007, 03:47:25 AM »
Out of curiousity, I am of Indian descent (from India, not native American), and I'm wondering how diverse is the Law school? Are there a lot of minorities? Are there any Indians? (I've never been to Virginia).

Thanks!

747
That is for last year, I am looking for the new numbers. But thanks for stepping up.


Penny, did you ever find the new numbers?

748
Since no one else seems to be jumping in to answer this question, I'll help you out. According to the subscription of USNews, GWU's PT numbers are:

Undergraduate GPA: 3.28 - 3.66
LSAT: 161 - 164

Hope that helps!

749
Studying for the LSAT / Re: My update box is filled!
« on: June 29, 2007, 04:35:50 PM »
Mine has just been updated!! 1:35 PM PST, took the test in SF, CA...

750
Studying for the LSAT / Re: My update box is filled!
« on: June 29, 2007, 04:16:15 PM »
I have been a long time lurker and now i have finally decided to create an account and join in on the madness...

Mine box is empty and i took the test in San Francisco...

It feels good having people who can share in my pain..  =)

Welcome Nischay!

...my box is filled! How can I see what time it happened?

Thank you for the welcome! I'm not sure since my box isn't filled. If it doesn't say, I'm assuming people are just saying the time that they noticed the box get filled... Where did you take the test?

Pages: 1 ... 70 71 72 73 74 [75] 76