Is Law School Archaic?

[Sephiroth]

I have a wondering if law school is archaic, meaning it is too narrowly-tailored in its subject matter, vis-a-vis undergrad course material (which is quite holistic) as in ls, you are just dealing with legal issues and legality over and over again..I know its fun, but does it get boring and tedious after a while?  

For example, I know B-school isn't necessarily so, as a broad range of topics are discussed and it can be quite fun.  Or  a masters in Political Science, engineering, etc., the activity and subject matter can be of a good variety.

Now law school is interesting too but is it ONLY if you want to practice law? Can you break into Investment Banking with it easier  than an MBA can?

There's that saying: "law school is  for hapless, one-time liberal arts graduates who couldn't do math or because they couldn't think of anything else better to do" = http://randomdude.com/blog/threads/777-LAW-SCHOOL-IS-BORING
LoL

I know law school can be good but was just wondering if it can get tedious
   

[StonewallJacksonFan]

I do not think Law School is archaic, there are just too many people who went there.  It might be less intellectually stimulating than other graduate degrees, but in the world of investment banking it is not about your intellectual versatility, but about pedigree.  I heard of people breaking into investment banking with JD, but the JD has to be at least out of top 20-30 school, preferably top 10.  Those people at IB do not care about your brain, just your family tree and the tree has to be off the shizzi. 

[nealric]

I have a wondering if law school is archaic, meaning it is too narrowly-tailored in its subject matte

It has to be at least somewhat narrowly tailored if you want to actually be prepared to practice law after graduation. It's not an amorphous personal development school like B-school.