Wasn't That Celebration a Bit Much?

By -
When the US beat Spain for the Olympic gold yesterday, the American players were all dancing, jumping up and down, and what not.

Come on now: This was almost every one of the best players in the NBA beating a team that, if it played in the league, probably wouldn't make the playoffs. (Yes, the Gasols are pretty good, but they also aren't Kobe or LeBron or Durant.)

Just imagine if I debated B. Murph on anarchism, and just narrowly defeated him in the debate! You sure as heck wouldn't see me dancing. I'd be looking kind of sheepish, thinking, "Gee, that was kind of embarrassing."

Comments

  1. Jonathan Finegold Catalán10:12 PM

    Others might say that you severely underestimated your opponent... but, who knows. ;) Talking about Spain, of course.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah11:07 PM

      By the way, Jonathan, I was actually rooting for Spain, for the same reason I rooted against Miami: piling all the best guys in one team just seems unfair to me. And Pau played a great game!

      Delete
  2. Anonymous1:24 AM

    I don't know if I *can* imagine that. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bob Murphy9:41 PM

    Gene if you beat me in a future debate, the angels will be shocked.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more