By John Considine
Over the last 24 hours an amount of Irish media outlets reported the comments of swimmer Daniel Wiffen about the Enhanced Games, e.g. "For me, it's not swimming". My guess is that "swimming" for Wiffen is more than specific movements of a body in liquid. I would guess that he means that it is more than having a level playing field (a poor image for a water sport) because there is the opportunity for all swimmers in the Enhanced Games to be on the same substance. Maybe we need to clearly define what we are seeking to discover when we run a competition (borrowing from a title of a famous Hayek article). Is it is how fast a human body can "naturally" cover a distance in water? But this begs the question as to what we mean by "natural".
We should keep an open mind and repeatedly ask what are we measuring. We might think we are measuring X when it might turn out we are measuring Z. In his experiments, Walter Michel started out trying to establish what strategies kids used to combat the pull of instant gratification. Offered a choice between one oreo (marshmallow) immediately or two when the experimenter returned, Michel observed the kids. Years later, Michel decided to see how his subjects were getting along with their lives. He discovered that those who were better at combatting the pull of instant gratification did better academically and in their careers. After the passage of another period of time, Michel returned again to the issue. Was there a potential cause outside the individuals themselves? He found that the kids who did better where those with wealthier parents. It can be difficult to devise a competition that measures exactly what one wishes to measure. How many poor kids don't get the opportunity to compete in various sports because of their poverty?
Tonight Newcastle United play in the UEFA Champions League. Some of their fans are not too pleased about the limits on "financial doping" due to rules such as the UK's version of Financial Fair Play. There is probably a grain of truth in the view that these rules are designed to keep poorer clubs from transforming themselves with the help of a "sugar daddy". The club picked a wealthy parent but are constrained in their use the owner's wealth.
In "Competition as a Discovery Procedure", Hayek mentioned sporting and academic competitions. Many of the "governing bodies" for academic competitions are worried about "unnatural" influences, i.e. the use of artificial intelligence. Academic doping. Enhanced intelligence. Objectors raise issues not dissimilar to financial doping or chemical doping in sport. But where does one draw the line. Students from wealthier backgrounds can afford private tuition ("grinds") or go to better institutions. Maybe AI levels the playing field. It brings us back to the question "what are we trying to measure when we are using a competition as a discovery procedure?"
In "Competition as a Discovery Procedure", Hayek mentioned sporting and academic competitions. Many of the "governing bodies" for academic competitions are worried about "unnatural" influences, i.e. the use of artificial intelligence. Academic doping. Enhanced intelligence. Objectors raise issues not dissimilar to financial doping or chemical doping in sport. But where does one draw the line. Students from wealthier backgrounds can afford private tuition ("grinds") or go to better institutions. Maybe AI levels the playing field. It brings us back to the question "what are we trying to measure when we are using a competition as a discovery procedure?"
RSS Feed
