<p>
[quote]
1. that the example I set out is an exception, which requires that you demonstrate a RULE and back it up with statistics.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Here are the transfer statistics of Ivy-League Institutions:
Harvard: 955/55
Yale: 696/26
Columbia: 1071/97
Brown: 686/189
Cornell: 2307/766
UPenn: 1543/336
Dartmouth: 305/34
The source is collegeboard.</p>
<p>Now do the admit rates for these institutions account for the majority of all transfers that occur annually in the United States? Obviously not. Even if I grant the assumption that all the students admitted into Ivy's intend to go to Law School, your argument still does not improve. I maintain that transferring to an Ivy and applying from an Ivy to a Law School is an exception to the rule, the fact that such Ivy Transfer admissions bear only a minuscule portion of all transfer acceptances that are given annually is attests to that.</p>
<p>
[quote]
2. that in my example, the person would have done better had it not been for the transfer - i.e. "but for" causation.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>With the above framework established, your example is rendered invalid. You cannot possibly use the example of Hanna as representative of all transfer applicants for law school. Even if you succeed in providing a more "mainstream" example, it still would not succesfully dismantle the author's argument. As a law student, you should know the distinction between induction and deduction. Inductive arguments will always contain exceptions; if a plethora of exceptions are found, then the induction is intrinsically fallacious - a hasty generalization. In order for you to overturn this specific induction, you must provide an excess of transfer cases that do not fall under the Ivy-League. This you cannot do.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I stand behind my assertion that your arguments are not rational and really are not relevant.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The label of irrationality is far down your list of problems if you perpetually interpret the argument in this manner.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Find the 2000 edition of Robert Miller's "Law School Confidential." Flip to the interview with the Penn admissions dean. She explicitly stated that transfer students look good to her.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What kind of transfers was he/she referring to? A student who transferred from community college to George Washington University or a student transferring from community college to Harvard? There is an enormous equivocation, and your argument rests on this ambiguity.</p>
<p>I would love to agree with you, as I am currently facing the choice transferring to Georgetown as a sophomore, or waiting another year and transferring to an Ivy-League (for the purpose of a stronger philosophy program). I am playing the devil's advocate; if you are correct, then I fear not when placing my deposit for Georgetown. Thus far, your arguments are unconvincing and ill-contrived. Tomorrow, when someone argues that, by miracle, he defied gravity, I will place the burden of proof on humanity to demonstrate that gravity is still present...</p>