Law School 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 - I hear America singing

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 70
Incoming 1Ls / Re: Inspiron 6000 Question?
« on: June 21, 2005, 04:51:37 PM »
I'm using the 6000 right now outside, and I can see the screen just fine, even with the sun.  Inside in a classroom setting, it's perfect.  I haven't had any problems with it yet.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: anyone else super lazy
« on: June 21, 2005, 01:44:15 PM »
Turow's friend in One L worked out an "emotional calculus" where he chose to speak two times for every five classes.  That way he still participated but the whole class didn't hate him.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Just Read Turow's One L
« on: June 21, 2005, 01:26:11 PM »
Are you sure you're not confusing One L with Law SchooL Confidential?  I read both, and I don't remember anything about highlighters in One L.  LSC goes on and on about their intricate multi-chromatic highlighting scheme. 

I'm glad I read One L because I think it painted such an absolutely worst case picture that the actual law school experience will seem like a pleasant surprise :)

It's in there- he mentions toward the beginning that he ran to the office supply store and picked up a bunch of them.  One of his friends started calling him the "Rainbow Kid".

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Just Read Turow's One L
« on: June 19, 2005, 08:32:09 PM »
I'm trying to stick to lighter summer fare this summer...I've got enough stress as it is.

Have you read any Connelly or Hiassen?  I'm not gay, but if I were I would definitely hit on Harry Bosch.  Hiassen is great because he reminds me of Wodehouse- both of them occasionally make you laugh out loud while you're reading.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: Just Read Turow's One L
« on: June 19, 2005, 07:29:58 PM »
I've started reading A People's History of the Supreme Court.  It's quite interesting and very readable.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: We should all be quite proud.
« on: June 19, 2005, 04:59:49 PM »
It's been great discussing this, it really has, but I'm bored now and I think I'll go for a bike ride.  If you want, you can pretend I left because I feared your rapier wit and worried that you would shove an intellectual proof down my throat.


Incoming 1Ls / Re: We should all be quite proud.
« on: June 19, 2005, 04:57:07 PM »
And that apples and oranges example was bunk.  I didn't address it because it didn't pertain to our discussion.  You implied by saying that only 1 out of 7000 people get to go to law school, that the other 6,999 were missing out somehow.  A closer apples oranges argument would be, "Out of a truckload of oranges, I got the only apple!"  Then one could reply, "I knew it!  You hate oranges!"

I hope you don't think either example contains a semblance of logic.  The individual in the latter sounds like an insecure orange grower on the verge of bankruptcy.  Furthermore, my statement that only 1 out of 7000 people getting into law school implies that... 1 out of 7000 people go to law school.  Anything else, and you're reaching.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: We should all be quite proud.
« on: June 19, 2005, 04:54:44 PM »
I pity the person who reads my statement and thinks, "Wow, that'll make a great target!"

I hope you're a happier person than I think you are.

As far as agreement goes, I think you'd rather root out an argument than accept any condition resembling anything close to mutuality.

I think I would rather you not agree with my statement, considering the kind of picture your words have painted you out to be.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: We should all be quite proud.
« on: June 19, 2005, 04:44:36 PM »
I think you took my statement and added your own interpretation.  I never said anything negative about those who don't go to law school; conversely, I said that we have something to be proud of.

It's baffles me how someone can take such an uplifting statement and twist it into a point of criticism.

Even though I'm going to become an attorney, I really don't think I'm going to like most of my professional peers.

If you don't like people who take your statements and turn them around to see the other side, then no, you most certainly won't like your colleagues.  Attorneys like to analyze, debate, and argue subjects until they've exhausted them.  C'mon!  You can do better than feigning shock and disappointment in your peers when they disagree or don't see your point.  Argue your side, sister!  This is your profession.  You will argue for a living, and the judge will not be pleased with a "He's just being mean" defense of your statement.  Tell me I'm wrong, I can take it, but leave the wishy-washy "I'm wounded" garbage at home.

I think you have to be able to turn that argumentative nature off when the time calls for it; I love to argue as much (if not more) than the next guy, but I know there's a time and place for it.  Sure, this is a discussion board, but I'm still baffled that you would take my statement, and instead of feeling proud, lash out at me dut to your own interpretation of my statement.  If this had been "Doctors and Teachers and Fathers and Mothers and European Backpack Travelers Discussion Board" or "We Love the World Discussion Board" the original scope of my statement would have been different.

Secondly, your line of attack is fairly weak insomuch as it can always be asserted, with generally less than impressive effectiveness.

Bob:  I love apples.

Sally:  Aha!  I knew it!  You hate oranges!

Saying one thing does not preclude consideration of the other or in any way specify the viewer's opinions on that which is not mentioned.  It is weak inductive logic at best, and foolhardy at worst.

...and there's a time and place for holding hands and singing kumbaya.  This ain't it.  We're too cynical and jaded.  We're your future colleagues.  Get used to it.

It's interesting, when I use emotional statements, you try psuedo-logic; yet when I use logic to disprove your point, you turn "wishy-washy".  Nice tango we're dancing there.

I'm convinced I'm not the only future lawyer who still holds out some hope.  There's got to be at least three of us.

Incoming 1Ls / Re: We should all be quite proud.
« on: June 19, 2005, 04:42:19 PM »
Why has it become the overarching belief in our society that intellectual behavior be coupled with outright cynicism?  It is almost as if we are not content to be unhappily disillusioned on our own, but instead we must attempt to destroy the patina of hope that resides in the precious few.

Intelligence should prompt us to be better human beings, not just smarter ones.

I think the reason you took so much flak for your post was because the tone sounded like everyone wants to go to law school and boy are we lucky we're the few that get to make that dream a reality.  My family and friends think I'm crazy for wanting to go when I've already got a good career, family, home, etc.  If it had been worded better, like "100,000+ applied and less than half got in.  We're the lucky ones," it would have come off better.

P.S.  If we were really out to be better human beings, we'd all be going to med school.   ;D  But not until we finished our 2-year stint in the Peace Corps. 

I think you, and the others, created that tone.

Secondly, there are millions upon millions of Americans who never get the chance to apply due to circumstances they cannot control.  By just looking at the application numbers, you are denying the fact that the applicant pool was dwindled long before we started thinking about the LSAT.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 ... 70