"But I'm pretty sure that the questions of e.g. the law exam are about laws"
I don't know about mcat, but no, lsat isn't about that at all. It would be weird testing people for the thing they're trying to be admitted to. If you google 'lsat sample questions', it"s trivial to find what sort of thing is beimg tested for. Which is not 'complete the pattern', but closer to that (I would argue) than to substantive law questions.
Fascinating. I didn't realize that was how law school admission worked.
By "law exam" I actually had in mind "the final exam" and whatever other tests you have to pass in order to not be thrown out of the program, once you're already in. (It seems the "bar exam" is not a prerequisite for a JD, though.) I guess the question is, which is more selective: law school admissions, or "who actually gets their degree once they're in law school"? Looks like the latter filter lets about one third through [1], while the former seems to pass one half if you just divide total admissions by total applications [2], although if we care more about "top law schools" I see various Google results saying it's more like 25%. So... reasonably similar-sized filters. Huh.
I also see an article titled "Law Schools With Low LSAT Medians Have Absurd Academic Attrition Rates" [3]. That would seem to support the notion that the LSAT genuinely is testing ability to do well at law, despite being a non-law exam.
I don't know about mcat, but no, lsat isn't about that at all. It would be weird testing people for the thing they're trying to be admitted to. If you google 'lsat sample questions', it"s trivial to find what sort of thing is beimg tested for. Which is not 'complete the pattern', but closer to that (I would argue) than to substantive law questions.