Ep. 153: A Bit Plebeian

The Thinking LSAT community is growing, dear listeners. And it’s badass. The Facebook group is at nearly 1,000 members. There are more patrons than ever (thanks, y’all). And the Thinking LSAT team has just expanded to include Annalisa and Sarah, our two VIPs (Volunteer-Intern Producer/Supreme Gatekeepers). Can you say ”celebration emoji”? The guys give thanks to all y’all who volunteered to help. It was a highly qualified pool of candidates. But alas, only two can hold the title of Supreme Gatekeeper. Then it’s down to brass tacks. The guys have a quick philosophical discussion about the important things in life, like can God microwave a burrito so hot that God can’t eat it. That sort of thing.

The live Thinking LSAT prep class in NYC (August 25-26) is right around the corner, and Ben and Nathan are hyped. The July class was awesome. If you want to get some live LSAT instruction from the guys in The Big Apple, enroll here.

Before jumping into a bunch of listener mail, the guys discuss LSAC’s twitter posts and wonder aloud why it takes for-fucking-ever for LSAC to turn around LSAT scores. Three weeks?! Give us a break…

15:48 – Ben and Nathan share some news from a recent ABA meeting where the ABA made some decisions regarding the 509 and 501 reports.

22:17 – Email 1—Welp. Jackson is kicking ass right out of the gate. Early diagnostics are all in the high 160s. But he’s not satisfied. After prepping for several hours a day and taking four—count ‘em—four practice tests, he’s not seeing improvements. He plans to take the LSAT in November, and with the autumn quickly approaching, he’s not very happy that he’s failed to broach 170. Plus, he has some difficulty with LR questions, but can’t home in on exactly why. He asks the guys if they have seen folks like him move out of the 160s and into the 170s. Nathan and Ben tell Jackson to hold his damn horses and get some more practice under his belt. Come talk to us when you’ve got 40 tests under your belt, ya know? By checking out Nathan’s free online course and Ben’s free online course, the guys feel confident that Jackson will indeed graduate into the 170s. They also give him some tips on how to improve his score in LR sections.

37:28 – Email 2—ILLogical Reasoning writes in to ask the guys about her personal statement. Her personal statement, she says, is the thing she’s most concerned about when it comes to applying to law school. Even though she’s active in a bunch of student organizations and has had a bunch of jobs, she doesn’t think she has an inspiring story to tell. The guys set the record straight. With a 3.98 GPA and an LSAT score in the 160s, you’re certainly a candidate for a T14 school, IR. And you don’t even need to have a juicy personal statement to get in! Still, Ben and Nathan give her some ideas about where to find inspiration for her personal statement, and suggest she pick up a copy of Ann Levine’s The Law School Admission Game: Play Like An Expert.

43:41 – Email 3—Rosa wants to know some of the particulars about getting accommodations on the LSAT. She’s only recently been diagnosed with depression and anxiety, and she wants to know if the guys think she stands a chance at getting accommodated testing. The guys basically tell Rosa to call LSAC, check out the LSAC website, register for the test, and apply for accommodations. That’s the only way to know if you qualify! But, hey, for what it’s worth, we haven’t heard of anyone being denied…

46:18 – Email 4—B.A.H. from Texas writes a particularly confusing-as-eff email that the guys try to decipher. It sounds like BAH is dealing with a poor LSAC GPA and is wondering if he should write an addendum. He wants to know if the guys’ personal-statement service includes help with addenda. The answer is “no,” but the guys try their best to answer BAH’s questions.

59:02 – Email 5—Jonathan’s been doing pretty well in his prep. But the LG sections are stumping him—even with Nathan’s Logic Games Playbook by his side. Hybrid games in particular are tripping him up. Ben and Nathan talk about ways to improve on the games, including making worlds and tackling the games from a new angle.

1:12:10 – Email 6—If you were to take the test and get a perfect score on three out of four sections, but then get 10 wrong in the fourth section, which section type would be the least concerning to go -10 in, as a prospective law student? That’s what anonymous wants to know. You’d likely still get a 170 on the test, but you’d go -10 in an LG, LR, or RC section. So, which would be the…best?…as in the best to be the worst? The guys discuss.

1 Comment


  1. The burrito question was answered pretty thoroughly by Leibniz (probably one of the smartest people to ever exist imo). In short, while God is all powerful, he is still a logical being. When one says that God is “all powerful,” this does not mean he can violate the laws of logic. So, the burrito question is irrelevant, because God can still be omnipotent, while still being unable to violate basic laws of logic. God can still be God and be unable to make A=~A.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *