Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. I'm assuming that they're too busy teeing up the evidence demonstrating that the LSAT is unique amongst all human endeavours in that anyone with enough time and effort can find themselves in the top 99.9% of all performers, even those scoring in the bottom percentile.
  3. Not particularly. For ease of reference I've quoted both the post you were responding to and your response with the relevant parts bolded. Notably your original response doesn't mention violence at all or even mention race. Probably because you were pretty clearly not responding directly to the part about race, that only came up when you wanted to avoid responding to Masterofnut directly. These are conspicuously the same parts that Masterofnut block quoted when asking you what the difference was, which you opted not to address. The idea of comparing generalizations with respect to an immutable characteristic like race to political groups is laughable. Lots of generalizations can and should be made to "an entire group".
  4. I just got into McGill!! I had my French comprehension test on Wednesday February 24th and I checked my Minerva today to see the offer of admission (conditional on the completion of a French course). I haven't received the letter yet but that will be coming on Monday I think-- I'm so happy!! I will be accepting I can't wait to meet you all (in person) in September! Stats: GPA (from McGill) honours in Philosophy : 3.76 No LSAT LOR's: both academic, one prof I took two classes with and was her RA, the other prof was my supervisor for my undergraduate thesis. EC's: I founded and ran an activist collective at McGill for 5 years, RA work in animal rights ethics and policy-making, won the Arts Award at graduation, was nominated for a few other awards during my time at McGill. I think my EC's helped me a lot.
  5. The classic "I don't have a good response to a rational argument against my bad point". But yeah too many logical flaws that you are too tired to point out. Edit: Kind of reminds me of that anti-masker in that one thread
  6. no...? If you want me to make it clear and simple for you @HammurabiTime, the person I replied to was drawing up an argument that shit human alt-righters subscribe to, which is that these negative characteristics xyz are drawn from a persons race. They were applying this extremist view to an entire group (conservatives), which is whats laughably stupid and uneducated. Does this clarify things?
  7. Viewed as equivalent to UBC in the Vancouver market. Doesn't have much of a national brand outside of BC (by no means poorly regarded elsewhere, but probably not given the credit it should and really not treated differently from any middle-of-the-road Canadian law school).
  8. Yea let's get back to that discussion. I was wondering where UVic would fall in an objective ranking. It's a small school and its median admission stats seem to be on the higher end. Other than that I don't know much about it. Anyone have any thoughts?
  9. Your comment replied specifically to the portion of his comment about why people are poor, which I quoted. It wasn't me trying to pull a gotcha, they were just direct equivalents
  10. How does this make me right wing? Is assessing evidence right wing? The Scientific method? There are good empirical ways to show that racism plays a role in life outcomes, that sexism plays a role in life choices of women, particularly with leaving the workforce and raising children, which is what accounts for 90% of the gender pay gap. These and many more things can be tested in sociology, sure not perfectly, but they at least can be falsified. How can you falsify a post modernist critique? If wanting evidence and analysis is right wing, what does that say about you Rashabon?
  11. Uhh... too many logical flaws in your comment for me to even respond lol.
  12. Is that the same as the comment about violence that you didn't directly respond to?
  13. I was mainly referring to the race baiting comment, which you casually removed from your comment. Too often I see both the left and right make arguments using premises that involve extremes and it's just so cringe.
  14. This is a sound view. I'd also like to add, be cautious to not over emphasis this particular matter in a personal statement. Try and incorporate other valuable experiences and attributes of yourself into a personal statement.
  15. It was awesome! I wrote my mid-term paper on Karl Urban's Dredd and my final paper on Napoleon Dynamite.
  16. Are you implying conservatives do not have the capacity to understand people and their behaviour, from a sociological perspective? Also your take on how a con would view why people is poor is laughably stupid and quite uneducated. A modern day con would typically make the argument that a person is poor because of their bad free will decisions whereas a lib would say that societal/external forces create the conditions that create these terrible outcomes. When I hear libs make that characterisation its almost as bad as when I hear cons yell communist at any hint of a social safety net program.
  17. "disastrous" that's quite an exaggeration, they showed many of the flaws of Keynesianism during stagflation. This played a pivotal part in making the ideas (post-Keynesianism, neo-Keynesian) stronger and improving them, now imagine if that didn't happen.... you know COVID-19, the way we put money into the system is so much better now than how the Keynesians used to do it. Because they had to greatly improve due to the Chicago school. Milton Friedman in the 70's proposed carbon taxes, an idea that is only being implemented 50 years later, this view of the world is why they got rid of the draft for the military. Fama greatly increased our knowledge of financial markets, these ideas helped our economy boom. Yes common sense has to be implemented, regulation is important, we shouldn't let big banks make bets with 33 to 1 leverage. They were advocating for the legalization of marijuana, where sadly many people were incarcerated and had their lives ruined. Yes there are shortcomings in the school, economics is extremely complex and relationships that seemed to explain things 30 years ago don't now, we have way more information and it has improved tremendously, whether you like it or not they helped improve the whole area of economics. Another thing about economics, a continuing trend since the Lucas critique has been it has become very empirical, econometrics is extremely sophisticated and they do pay attention to evidence. These things can be disproven, whereas with the postmodernists you can't disprove them because the theories are largely rational. Economics you live and die by the evidence now a days, the theory must be falsifiable. Postmodernism you create another rational construct in your mind.
  18. I work within the circles of people who would have a better idea than most, I can ask my boss what their predictions are currently and post a thread about it if people want to hear (second hand)? I did ask the same question a few weeks ago to my mum who is a prof in the medical field (things change quickly though) and she guessed school will be mostly online (with the exception of medicine and other degrees which require in person). She was doubtful that law-school will be in person, but this is more of an informed guess. I will ask my boss next week and post if people are interested.
  19. idk if it was more interesting but rather equally uninteresting I did actually gain some good insight, but from like 3 posts. Hopefully others gained something as well.
  20. It’s more interesting than having the school ranking discussion 1000 times.
  21. This happens a lot in these big threads lol. It's almost formulaic. Person A argues something. Person B refutes. Person A claps back. Person B latches onto a small detail of Person A's argument and picks it apart. Person A claps back on that small detail and elaborates on why it wasn't, in fact, flawed. Person B picks apart Person A's reasoning once again regarding the flaw in the small detail of their first argument. So on and so forth, suddenly the thread derails, and the small detail becomes the whole conversation. OP watches in horror as their inbox is blown to shreds. Stonks?
  22. I mean you technically can’t get a job on Tuesday because of the rules. The chances of being hired after a single day of interviews in the OCI process is slim.
  23. I guess access to abortion, increasing the supply of subsidized housing, increasing microfinance etc are all indicative of right wing. My point was people on the right typically say they (racism, sexism) play a minor role in life outcomes, while I think they are much more than minor. Either it proves the assessment right or it doesn't, but how does it "kinda" prove it? Do you mean support?
  1. Load more activity

  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up

×
×
  • Create New...