<p>(DMC parries your light-sabre stroke and somersaults over you) :)</p>
<p>Cwhite, you did post that. But I suspect that nspeds permeated the issue out of sheer indulgence. I trust that it was not meant sardonically either. I have only perused 'De La Grammatologie' but I see now that I should have held on to that particular number for obvious reasons. However, I am first and foremost a law applicant. Judging by nspeds' comments, maybe Derrida's piece is quite paltry and not a contribution to my LSAT preparation. You were also valid by pointing out how blanket lit crit is. I just figured deconstruction is but another piece in the amalgamation that is the literary criticism puzzle. Apparently, I may have been wrong.</p>
<p>I am only a rising sophomore in college, so until I have an official score, I will not reveal it.</p>
<p>This is generally because if my practice scores are made official (posted online, written, etc.) I will feel an added pressure, which is not healthy. I prefer to say that I am doing well so far, and I am praying that this success spills into my actual LSAT performance.</p>
<p>Note: I have mild OCD, so have patience with me.</p>
<p>Oh that's perfectly fine. This might seem a bit of a sophomoric query, but what EXACTLY is on the LSAT? I know what the applicants are expected to know in order to conquer it, but what are the sections of it?</p>
<p>It comprises a reading comprehension, short passage, and logic games section. The short passage section will present you with small stories and you must find either the missing assumption, the logical flaw, what premiss would most strengthen (or weaken) a given argument, and so on. The logical games section consists of four individual sections comprising a series of 6-7 questions each (I think). Each section establishes a general framework and you must answer the corresponding questions by drawing certain conclusions from that framework.</p>
<p>Many consider the logic games to be the most difficult section; I think it is because of the time-constraints. However, I love to call it 'logic games' (instead of the official 'analytical reasoning?') because they are fun. I usually do one problem set every morning, akin to the morning jog that clears one's mind.</p>
<p>Edit: I have to get back to my readings, so I will not be able to answer any more questions; I am sure others, however, will be better equipped to field your inquiries.</p>
<p>DMC - head on over to your nearest Books-A-Million or B & N and buy a crappy LSAT prep book and work the sample tests. That'll give you a good idea.</p>
<p>Geez. In a perfect world, I'd take both you guys out for a good time (don't be gross - I mean to drink a bit, laugh, loosen up).</p>
<p>Good luck in your studies, nspeds (gosh, I remember being so immersed that I could [almost] speak in such probing terms!) and best on LSAT prep, DMC. :)</p>
<p>I have no qualms about who I am or where I'm going. One of the graces gained by working in the real world is the healthy dose of REALITY it tosses into your naive little face. I've taken my kicks, know what I'm capable of and what's important to me. I've got decent scores, a kick-a$$ work ethic and a family to consider (in terms of location most of all) so I'm shooting for a T1 or T2 and won't EVEN delude myself into thinking a T14 is possible. And I'm not sour grapsing (shut up - I'm a linguist - I can do as I like ;)) it when I say I wouldn't be happy in a T14 anyway - I want to do something effective, something productive and three years of intimidation aren't exactly conducive to such.</p>
<p>But I work all over the country - as I work in your respective cities, I'll put you guys into my carry-on and introduce you to single malt scotch! lol!</p>
<p>You guys have completely hijacked this post. nspeds I know you are deeply involved with your philosophical explorations but most of us, sadly, are not. Forgive me for saying this, but I believe if you see this thread in a couple months you would see how your familiar world has gradually departed from ours. I have not seen you write a pertinent, helpful post in a long time. As for cwhite, I have a fairly strong desire to join in on your mellow alcholism. Devil May Cry, you are just damn cool. Well, that's basically the last three pages. Let's move on.</p>
<p>Do not fret, Wildflower. You and sreis are both coming for drinks as well. As soon as nspeds finishes reading the Bible, we will go to the most expensive restaurant and talk about the most trivial of subject matters. Sreis, Cwhite, Wildflower, nspeds, and Devil May Cry all sitting together having drinks. Wouldn't that be a hell of a thing? :)</p>
<p>"Oh and I would relish the opportunity to have drinks with the both of you. Maybe we can at Harvard law?"</p>
<p>Oh, it was Stanford last week, wasn't it? You should have found out what was on the LSAT before you began to consider yourself a law school applicant, nevermind one who plans on going to Harvard or Stanford. I mean, really.</p>
<p>"You should have found out what was on the LSAT before you began to consider yourself a law school applicant, nevermind one who plans on going to Harvard or Stanford. I mean, really."</p>
<p>Really? I was always told to not to worry about the LSAT until my sophomore year in colllege.</p>
<p>ElectronicError, that's the whole point! :) My ostentatious comments were only in the spirit of fun and I am not quite sure how I could have possibly exacerbated you. After all, I am just starting college and I see no reason to delve into the LSAT currently. I'm just trying to have a good time for the next four years. I simply want to get into a law school, and any school really will do. I will just let the cards unfold as they see fit. Moreover, when did I ever mention Stanford? :confused:</p>
<p>Edit: Boethian, you of course are invited. :)</p>
<p>Did you not read what I just posted? I apologize anyway though if I appear splashy.</p>
<p>Back on topic....</p>
<p>I was wondering, is Classics a good major for law? I am really interested in the Greek/Roman history and it seems like I could be doing something I enjoy whilst receiving the necessary crtical thinking skills needed in LS.</p>
<p>Thank you for the explanation. I was referring to one post in which you mentioned that you would be in the Class of 2012 at Stanford Law School, which I thought embraced an attitude of premature overconfidence that I couldn't endorse. If that comment was in good fun also, then I have no problem with it at all.</p>
<p>As for your question, I definitely recommend that you look into the Classics major, since it is the toughest and most fulfilling major in the humanities (IMHO). Beware--ancient Greek is extremely difficult. I'm taking Attic Greek and Latin this summer and have managed to get through a semester of Latin so far, but Greek is an entirely different story. :)</p>
<p>Thanks, ElectronicError. Are you looking to take advantage of any study abroad programs this upcoming year? That would be really fun.</p>
<p>Oh and I do apologize a million times over for appearing bombastic and puerile. I realize that most of you are far more innately talented than I.</p>
<p>I think I would like to do one eventually, but Cornell's programs require you to be reasonably proficient in a langauge before you begin to study abroad, so they are most suited for rising juniors and seniors. I'm sure Duke's programs operate in a similar way.</p>