Stephen Dubner on cheating: a response
As much as we profess to like the games for the games’ sake, perhaps cheating is part of the appeal, a natural extension of sport that people condemn on moral grounds but secretly embrace as what makes sports most compelling.
No, actually it’s not.
For all the talk of how cheating “destroys the integrity of the game,” maybe that’s not true at all? Perhaps cheating actually adds a layer of interest — a cat-and-mouse element, a detective-story element — that complements the game?
No, it doesn’t.
Just as the theological concept of the Resurrection is so powerful (see Tyler Cowen’s discussion here of the theology behind Freakonomics, a notion I find flattering, if exaggerated), and just as a harsh winter is followed by an insistent spring, I wonder if our interest in sport too springs eternal, not in spite of the cheating scandals, but because of them?
No. It’s “in spite of.” (And what the hell’s all that about the Resurrection?)
Alan, I do believe you won this argument handily.
— Peter Suderman · Feb 21, 11:03 PM · #
Yeah, well, you know, sometimes it’s just time for a beatdown.
— Alan Jacobs · Feb 22, 03:39 PM · #
This might explain a lot about all the ethnical corners Dubner and his co-author freakonomist Steve Levitt cut on their rise to riches and fame.
— Steve Sailer · Feb 22, 09:08 PM · #
At least, in contrast to most such speculations, he offers up a testable hypothesis. Which is such a rare thing that it’s a shame to dismiss it out of hand. There is an answer, and it’s not obvious to me that the answer would be “no”. An experiment testing this idea would be very interesting.
— Tony · Feb 23, 06:27 AM · #