Skip to main content

Home/ New Media Ethics 2009 course/ Group items tagged Athletic Competition

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Weiye Loh

Skepticblog » Nash Equilibrium, the Omerta Rule, and Doping in Cycling - 0 views

skepticblog.org/...doping-in-cycling

Doping Athletic Competition Nash Equilibrium Ethics

shared by Weiye Loh on 15 Jul 10 - Cached
  • Forget about trying to catch doping. It’s a game the “good guys” can never win. Stop testing at all, and declare open season. Treat doping as just something else that the sportsmen can do to improve their performance, much the same as spending money on a good bike isn’t considered cheating.
  • Curious on what motivates you to draw the line of acceptability after a vigorous diet and exercise regime, nutritional supplements, a pro trainer, and other measures specifically designed to manipulate the body for enhanced athletic performance, but before PEDs.
  • Weiye Loh on 15 Jul 10
     
    NASH EQUILIBRIUM, THE OMERTA RULE, AND DOPING IN CYCLING
Weiye Loh

What Is Academic Work? - NYTimes.com - 0 views

opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/...what-is-academic-work

Academic Research Academia Politics

shared by Weiye Loh on 08 Feb 11 - No Cached
  • After it was all over, everyone pronounced the occasion a great success; not because any substantive problems had been solved, but because a set of intellectual problems had been tossed around and teased out by men and women at the top of their game.
  • academic work is distinctive — something and not everything — and that a part of its distinctiveness is its distance from political agendas. This does not mean that political agendas can’t be the subject of academic work — one should inquire into their structure, history, etc. — but that the point of introducing them into the classroom should never be to urge them or to warn against them.
  • The conference format reflected its academic (not policy) imperatives. A presenter summarized his or her paper. A designated commentator posed sharp questions. The presenter responded and then the floor was opened to the other participants, who posed their own sharp questions to both the presenter and the commentator. The exchanges were swift and spirited. The room took on some of the aspects of an athletic competition — parry, thrust, soft balls, hard balls, palpable hits, ingenious defenses and a series of “well dones” said by everyone to everyone else at the end of each round.
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • The kind of questions asked also marked the occasion as an academic one. Not “Won’t the economy implode if we do this?” or “Wouldn’t free expression rights be eroded if we went down that path?”, but “Would you be willing to follow your argument to its logical conclusion?” or “Doesn’t that amount to just making up the law as you go along?” These questions were continuations of a philosophical conversation that stretches back at least to the beginning of the republic; and while they were illustrated by real-world topics (the pardon power, habeas corpus, the electoral college), the focus was always on the theoretical puzzles of which those topics were disposable examples; they were never the main show.
1 - 2 of 2
Showing 20▼ items per page