Kuhn v Determinism, wow, that will be a game. How do we make sense of the match-up? What are we left to debate? The Essential Tension between them, as it were, would be Kuhn's influence (which he later disavowed) on the social constructivists, on those who rejected the deterministic mindset of earlier philosophical studies of science (on the one hand) versus that Determinism itself (on the other hand). Does "this" lead straight to "that," directly, ineluctably? Or does "this" get to "that" in ways we can't entirely anticipate?
So I wonder which Kuhn will show up, the 1962 Structures guy, or the 1977 second edition guy who wasn't too pleased with what the sociology of scientific knowledge was doing? The one whose work about how scientific knowledge grows trounced Popper's, that is? Or the one whose notion that the means for that growth lie not in technical, objective, logical means, but social criteria that belies the more determinist view? Hoo boy, and I'm not even sure those are two separate things! Or if those sentences are grammatically correct. Getting a headache now, thanks much. Just skip those last three lines and weigh in on the winner.
Theory v. Pluto. Hmm, Theory and Pluto. Definitely one of the more intriguing competitions. Because I'm thinking, and hear me out, I'm thinking Pluto's problem all season - hell, for the entire history of its program - was the absence of some theory to give it a home. Am I onto anything there? Because if that's the case, then this one's gonna be a grudge match to the end, and I wouldn't even be surprised if Pluto was too in awe of Theory to stay with it. Or do I have that backwards? Will Pluto be so pissed, so keyed up over Theory's absence in its life for so long, like the son whose Dad never came to see him play, that they will play like a pitbull unleashed, a pitbull reared on images of meat roasting on a spit, dripping grease and calling its name? (hmmm - so in that mixed metaphor, the pitbull is Pluto and the Dad - no, the Theory, yeah, Theory - is the meat ...so Pluto gets the meat. I mean the Dad. I mean, I mean Theory. The pitbull represents the Id. And Theory is anima? Did we have a Freud v Jung in early rounds? I can't mix those up. Sue's the only one who'll figure out what I was going for here. And let me know what it was, by the way.)
Well, we just looked in on that continuing first round Logic v Logic game, and they're still in a deadlock in the 493rd overtime. Corporate will have a few more days to rest, then. They can take a brather at the condo's they own in Aspen. Or Tahoe. Or Nags Head. Or Montreal. Or Miami. Or Grand Cayman. Or Aruba. Or Midland, MI. That may not be good. They tend to get shiftless and lazy when they don't play. And they may come to resent Logic even more then they already do, if that's the case. But for us in the booth, what do we say? Does that take them off their game? Or does it, like Pluto/son/pitball, get them the intensity they need? We shall see.
Now, the last one, Darwin and the Royal Society, I mean, the pride and heritage there is something. What do we know about their past courtship? What do we know about their relationship over the years? I wonder. No really I wonder - whose got the goods on that?
- Log in to post comments
I just know Pluto will win in their match-up. Theory is just going to get confused over the whole pluto/goofy man dog thing.
As well, I have Darwin on my sheet. It's his anniversary for heaven's sake, and if Corporate gets bored waiting, I'm sure there's a marketing opportunity there.
I wanna see Kuhn and Theory, and I don't think Pluto can sustain it's first round high anyway, so that should work.
Corporate is obviously gonna win, they always win, even with their dull game plan and obvious buy-out of the refs.
And Darwin will crush, I'm sure. No point even discussing that one.
Jenjen's got it. Pluto's on a roll. Kuhn shoulda lost to Popper anyway. Go Pluto!!
determinism! darwin!
yay!
Word on the street is that Newton and them Royal Society dudes cornered poor Darwin in the locker room and shaved his beard off. Is this true? I only ask, because Team Darwin seems to have adopted the song "Not ready to make nice" (by the Dixie Chicks) as their anthem, so something must have pissed them off.
oy vey! logic is so going to tear up Corporate! i mean, if you think about how far a strategy of accumulation-for-the-sake-of-accumulation can last against, well, the finite-ness of planetary resources, Corporate would have been a more entertaining match with entropy as the opponent.
(wait...i think i was just using logic. see!!! they're everywhere!)
oy vey! logic is so going to tear up Corporate!
If the game were, say, 20 years long, I'd have to agree with you. But Corporate has the firepower and the resources necessary to dominate in the short-term, which means big scores and a shallow bench. They're like Duke or, um, the New York Yankees--it takes much longer than a 40-minute game to keep these guys down! Besides, you NEED a team like corporate to make that cinderella team's victory even sweeter! I'm picking Corporate to go all the way to the Final Four, Baby!
I think determinism is going to have a problem. Ultimately, it's inflexible, and we know what it'll do. Kuhn will just view this as a normal game, and I reckon will respond with something revolutionary. Now, this may not be popular initially, but over the game I think we'll see the fans get behind Kuhn's new ideas, and result in a big win that will significantly change the way the game is played. A paradigm shift, if you will.
Of course it was theory who first found Pluto, and showed how Pluto could make things happen. But since then, Pluto seems to have been cast adrift in the void: theory was nowhere to be seen during Pluto's recent travails. I reckon Pluto will win, because it wants to win this more.
Corporate will have met its match in Logic (whichever one: they're both too strong). The present game won't affect Logic adversely: it won't get tired, and if anything the continued practice makes it stronger. And whilst Corporate may end up appealing to the referees/judges/UN Court of Human Rights, Logic's case will be solid.
The final match-up is intriguing. Of course it was the Royal Society that gave Darwin its first break, it the match-up with Wallace, and has been supportive of Darwin ever since (and it was also its Edinburgh feeder team that brought through Darwin's prodigy Fisher). It's really difficult to call, although the Royal Society's greater breadth may help it win in the end.
Bob
Oh, and can I have another vote for Kuhn? Simply because Determinism only really has one joke, and you know it's going to be used in every post on Determinism.
Bob
Seems to me that, in the spirit of the Science Spring Shodwon, Bob has the best point so far: Determinism only really has one joke, and you know it's going to be used in every post....
The fans have to rally behind Kuhn, if for not other reason than Bob's.
I'm so disappointed in markus. Seriosuly, logic over corporate? Where have you been living these past decades, some sort of marxian-scientist paradise? Corporate trumps every time - even if we don't want them to. The others are going to be close calls. Kuhn v. Determinism pits one old hat against another. I've got to take determinism, though. Seriously, can you argue against it? JenJen has it nailed with Pluto over theory. Did you se the regualr season match up? Theory as crumbling, saved only by a last minute technical. I don't think they'll be as lucky this time around. Finally, Darwin all the way. The Royal Society has problems getting off the benhc, and Darwin's strong throughout.
Yes. We have to.
Damn, that is the same joke as well.
Bob
I, too, have to go with Kuhn. Determinism is sooo last season, and it's about time for the paradigms to shift in Kuhn's favor.
Pluto's scrappy. And I like an underdog.
That's why I'm also siding with dark-horse Royal Society. We all love Darwin, but he might be a bit cocky coming off his win over the Lord and Savior, you know?
And yes, corporate always trumps logic. Duh.
Hey Leslie. Round two results are already up for the CHAIR region. Go here to see the outcomes.