Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- 33.6K All Categories
- 28.2K LSAT
- 17.1K General
- 5.2K Logical Reasoning
- 1.4K Reading Comprehension
- 1.7K Logic Games
- 70 Podcasts
- 192 Webinars
- 11 Scholarships
- 194 Test Center Reviews
- 2.2K Study Groups
- 112 Study Guides/Cheat Sheets
- 2.5K Specific LSAT Dates
- 36 November 2024 LSAT
- 18 October 2024 LSAT
- 9 September 2024 LSAT
- 38 August 2024 LSAT
- 28 June 2024 LSAT
- 4 April 2024 LSAT
- 11 February 2024 LSAT
- 22 January 2024 LSAT
- 38 November 2023 LSAT
- 43 October 2023 LSAT
- 14 September 2023 LSAT
- 38 August 2023 LSAT
- 27 June 2023 LSAT
- 30 Sage Advice
- 5K Not LSAT
- 4.1K Law School Admissions
- 13 Law School Explained
- 10 Forum Rules
- 647 Technical Problems
- 288 Off-topic
Related Discussions
How much outside knowledge can I use for the writing section?
Auran Buckles
Free Trial Member
Hi,
I have been reading through some of the past writing section topics, and it seems like the general pattern is they give you a dilemma type of situation or two choices, and then based on some requirements/considerations you need to choose and argue for what is best.
My question is, how much outside knowledge can we bring into this? I'm sure we can put in principles we believe work best or knowledge on other subjects (math, economics, etc), but what about adding onto the considerations that are already stated? For example, if the client in the question values x and y and I must consider them in making the argument for my choice, can I say something like "I believe this option is best because it creates some x and y but also adds the value of z (that I think is also important in making the choice)"?
Any input will be greatly appreciated.
I have been reading through some of the past writing section topics, and it seems like the general pattern is they give you a dilemma type of situation or two choices, and then based on some requirements/considerations you need to choose and argue for what is best.
My question is, how much outside knowledge can we bring into this? I'm sure we can put in principles we believe work best or knowledge on other subjects (math, economics, etc), but what about adding onto the considerations that are already stated? For example, if the client in the question values x and y and I must consider them in making the argument for my choice, can I say something like "I believe this option is best because it creates some x and y but also adds the value of z (that I think is also important in making the choice)"?
Any input will be greatly appreciated.
Comments
From what I know about the writing sample, I wouldn't include any outside knowledge. Stick to the information you're presented with and make a clear, concise argument based off of that. If law schools look at your writing sample, they're looking to see how you can write not your outside knowledge of the subject.