I seriously dislike the Thinking LSAT Podcast

brigitte

Does anyone share this opinion? The hosts are far too dogmatic regarding their advice...it's very strange to me for reasonable people to be so dogmatic - about reading the stem first, about whether "principle" questions exist, about whether "most strongly supported questions" are the same as "Must be true" questions, about timing strategies, and more. I can understand having preferences for how to approach the test, but it often seems like they take unreasonably strong stances on issues more as a pedagogic technique to get people to approach the test in the way that they think best, whereas if they were being purely reasonable they would recognize the potential benefits of alternate approaches even if ultimately they advise against them. It's also very strange that they basically write off 7sage PURELY because they recommend stem first on LR - they've gone as far as to say they can't trust any curriculum that gives that advice. That line of reasoning seems so clearly flawed that they must know it's unreasonable.

Pride Only Hurts

Truly an awful podcast. I couldn't get through a full episode.

Leah M B

I listened to it a decent amount a year ago or so and funny enough, just went back to it and listened to an ep this morning. They definitely have massive flaws, one of which is always bagging on 7sage lol. The recent ep I just heard, someone wrote in and said they were considering each of the 2 hosts online classes or 7sage's and wanted to hear their pitches. And Nathan said something along the lines of, well 7sage isn't an actually classroom course and there's no instructor and he absolutely can't recommend their methods. Hahahaha. I mean... you don't see JY's face, sure... but there is an actual person teaching the lessons. Not like it's some robot doing it. I personally think it's less distracting this way. I'm not looking at a person or a setting, focusing visually only on the material. And as we all know, 7sage's methods are preeeeetty good. Haha.

I've heard them make fun of "reading for structure", reading the stem first (which I def think is valuable), and also emphasize that the only type of practice that you need to do is timed sections... all of which I disagree with. They're definitely opinionated. And I do think that most people should acknowledge that there are different methods that work for different people. JY's comparative RC method didn't work for me, so I did something else. That's how it works for all of us. I mostly just find it funny though.

I often want to shout at them:

https://media.giphy.com/media/WXtccLGTLB1NS/giphy.gif

All that said, I enjoy listening to some LSAT stuff outside of studying just to kind of keep it fresh in the brain and motivate me, so I imagine I'll still listen off and on. But I highly disagree both with their approach and how dogmatic they are about it. They're not the ones that invented LSAT studying. There are lots of folks out there doing things different ways that also work.

BinghamtonDave

I'll listen to them once in awhile. If I'm doing something outside: chopping wood or gardening, I'll throw their podcast on. Overall, I think the hosts are two competent LSAT teachers and there are useful nuggets here and there on their podcasts, plus there are very few regularly updated shows/podcasts that talk LSAT/admissions etc...So the show is relevant to what many of us are going through.
I understand your criticism, for sure though. Mr. Fox in particular can come off as a bit, how shall I say: no nonsense, when it comes to studying techniques that deviate from the approach the show advocates, but...such is life. I tend not to take to heart much of anything the podcast says in this vein, simply because it is easy to point to people who have been successful doing things differently from what the show often advocates.

Listening to the podcast is to me a bit like reading a really good Originalists argument, chock-full of interesting and valuable threads, but to a certain degree rigid.

David

ChaimtheGreat

I have heard maybe two or three of their shows- which ones rag on 7Sage? I am a huge question-stem first person and think 7Sage is the best out there at knowing how to approach the test. From the episodes I listened to, they are also super anti- T14. It seemed like they thought that anyone who went to a T14 for anything more than full tuition was an idiot.

Leah M B

@ChaimtheGreat said:
I have heard maybe two or three of their shows- which ones rag on 7Sage? I am a huge question-stem first person and think 7Sage is the best out there at knowing how to approach the test. From the episodes I listened to, they are also super anti- T14. It seemed like they thought that anyone who went to a T14 for anything more than full tuition was an idiot.

Ep 156 "The Man with the Kind Eyes" is the one that I mentioned that I just listened to and he rips on 7sage a bit. There are notes in the description that shows you the timing for the discussion. Don't remember the others, they were older ones from the last couple years. Sometimes they don't talk about 7sage explicitly, but the concepts (like reading the stem first, reading for structure...). They complain about Blueprint sometimes too. Basically just anything that's not their own methods.

Bamboosprout

Interesting discussion. I always imagined that although there is a bit of competitive spirit between prep services, that overall, they're complimentary and open to others. I've only been exposed to powerscore and 7sage, which have been pretty flexible with each other. It's a little weird for me to see close-mindedness being a characteristic that goes along with LSAT prowess.

tekken1225

They actually have a LSAT podcast? Lol, now I've seen everything.

Lawster9

I find their show to be pretty funny.

But yes, they DEFINITELY don't believe in reading the question stem first, and are indeed super dogmatic, which just contributes to the funny value imo.

I think it's also been helpful to listen to them review personal statements that peeps send in. They really rip into crappy writing.

LSAT_Wrecker

They are more frank and straightforward than many people are used to, but I find them entertaining for what they do. They have strong positions on LSAT study, many of which I don’t ascribe to. I do find their deconstruction of personal statements and essays extremely helpful and insightful. I would say their free product is definitely worth what I pay to receive it.