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 - StevePirates

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 72
21
Good.  Take your evil bastard ass elsewhere, StevePiates.  You are a monster and I hate you.  We all hate you.

Maybe we don't hate StevePirates personally, but we hate the graph he posted. I do. But he does seem like a decent person in his other posts.

I wonder if Pilofolo is an alt?

I didn't post the graph, I just relinked to it.

22
Steve:  For your safety and the safety of others, please leave this thread.  Or I'm gonna have to get vicious.

Well, since there's really nothing more to say on the subject of intelligence distribution amongst the professions, now that an official graph has been posted, I don't really have anything else to say in this thread. 

23
Something tells me that PILO is in the sub100 end of the attorney distribution.

And by something I mean PILO's last two posts.

24

You're right, because we all know freight truck drivers and college professors are interchangeable.  I mean really, if Stephen Hawkins was mobile, he'd be fighting fires right now.

http://www.woosk.com/2008/11/list-of-iqs-by-profession.html



This link supports my original argument about mean and range. Look at the distribution difference between MDs and Attorneys.

25
There is a large range of intellectual ability among all of those groups.  People are smart in different ways. 

If I had to guess and make horrible generalizations, I'd put money on "scientists" having the smartest people in absolute terms (Stephen Hawking), but also a very wide intelligence range; doctors* having the highest mean and median IQ; and attorneys and engineers being roughly equivalent in both distribution of talent and intelligence, just in completely opposite areas.

There are certainly a lot of attorneys out there who are smarter than doctors, but there are a lot of doctors out there smarter than attorneys.

*MDs and DOs only.

26

So you're making assumptions that you know or have reason to know are untrue, is that right?

Always!

27

Works for me.  So you retract this previous statement: "I am of the opinion that you can't have too many law schools, or new lawyers"?  ;)

Nope, I don't retract it, I'm just informing your understanding of it in context.  You can never have to many lawyers.  But only lawyers who can pass the bar.  If you have 100% of the population able to pass a bar that is sufficiently difficult as to ensure competent legal services, then so be it!   ;D

28

To restate some things that nealric has already broached, the lawyer who fails ends up hurting a lot of people on his or her road to realizing that he or she cannot make a living practicing law.  I've heard too many stories about people whose lawyers screwed up their cases to believe that we should just let everybody take a shot and see how they do.  :(

Please note: this post does not express a position in terms of how we should restrict access to the profession. 

Then raise the Bar so to speak.  J.D.s are worthless outside of their ability to help you land a job.  Bar admission should be the final arbiter, and if too many people are passing the bar and harming consumers, then raise the bar requirements. 

On a completely different tract, plenty of damage done by attorneys at the top end of the spectrum as well as the bottom end.

29
What exactly would be a "failed lawyer?"

In my mind, one who cannot make a living practicing law.

30
California Western / Re: Cal Western or Thomas J
« on: April 29, 2009, 02:56:42 PM »
oh just for the hell of it, what do you guys make of this recurrent rumor?

http://jollylawger.com/?p=107

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 72