Pale Sprinters


Forum devoted to track & field items of an historical nature.

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby user4 » Fri Mar 29, 2013 4:51 am

Marlow wrote:
Daisy wrote:
mrbowie wrote:I deserved to be flogged for re-igniting this thread.

Do we still do TAFNY's around here? This deserves one!! :mrgreen:

Pick your aphorism:

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
No good deed goes unpunished.

:D


actually neither one applies here, if the good mrbowie really feels the way he has expressed then it was not a good that got punished and therefore not an example of "no good deed goes unpunished" . Likewise how could it be a good intention to bring up a topic that you loath and attribute moral failings to (unless perhaps you are feigning contempt). A better analogy might be an "agent provocateur" but that likely fails too. Truth is sometimes very uncomfortable and telling it can lead to punishment in any narrow social economy where impressions and perceptions are far more important than any peculiar material facts.
user4
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Marlow » Fri Mar 29, 2013 5:35 am

user4 wrote:1. Likewise how could it be a good intention to bring up a topic that you loath and attribute moral failings to (unless perhaps you are feigning contempt).
2. Truth is sometimes very uncomfortable and telling it can lead to punishment in any narrow social economy where impressions and perceptions are far more important than any peculiar material facts.

1. I neither loathe nor attribute moral failings to this topic. I find it absurd. Since no one can explain to me what constitutes 'black' or 'white' in this context, I point out the inanity and futility of the discussion.
2. I love the truth; It can set us free. But as you know, there is never just one truth. People's individual perspectives ensure that. My truth is contained in answer 1. above; yours does not, I gather. So be it.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21082
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby user4 » Fri Mar 29, 2013 5:55 am

Marlow wrote:
user4 wrote:1. Likewise how could it be a good intention to bring up a topic that you loath and attribute moral failings to (unless perhaps you are feigning contempt).
2. Truth is sometimes very uncomfortable and telling it can lead to punishment in any narrow social economy where impressions and perceptions are far more important than any peculiar material facts.

1. I neither loathe nor attribute moral failings to this topic. I find it absurd. Since no one can explain to me what constitutes 'black' or 'white' in this context, I point out the inanity and futility of the discussion.
2. I love the truth; It can set us free. But as you know, there is never just one truth. People's individual perspectives ensure that. My truth is contained in answer 1. above; yours does not, I gather. So be it.


1. no one used the word black or white,.. allow me to repeat again , you are the only one calling for an all encompassing universal theory of human categories in black and white terms. We simply make observations and find patterns and wonder why. The patterns may be explained by allot of factors, predictors. Im open to explanations and my container wants to grow.

2. so be it :)
user4
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Marlow » Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:04 am

user4 wrote:no one used the word black or white

I find that disingenuous. The word 'pale' in this thread title refers directly to 'white' sprinters, as opposed to 'black' sprinters. It is one of many threads about 'pale' sprinters, all of which have run out the same canards about 'white vs. black'. If the discussion were about the tendencies of west central African ethnic sprinters vs, northern European ethnic sprinters, I would totally agree that the former have genetic superiority, on average, over the latter in terms of sprinting. That has NOT been the gist of the conversation in all these threads. It has been about identifying individuals (of mixed ethnicity, of which more and more of us are) and assigning them to boxes.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21082
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby user4 » Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:02 am

Marlow wrote:
user4 wrote:no one used the word black or white

I find that disingenuous. The word 'pale' in this thread title refers directly to 'white' sprinters, as opposed to 'black' sprinters. It is one of many threads about 'pale' sprinters, all of which have run out the same canards about 'white vs. black'. If the discussion were about the tendencies of west central African ethnic sprinters vs, northern European ethnic sprinters, I would totally agree that the former have genetic superiority, on average, over the latter in terms of sprinting. That has NOT been the gist of the conversation in all these threads. It has been about identifying individuals (of mixed ethnicity, of which more and more of us are) and assigning them to boxes.


I think it is curious that athletes of largely west african ancestry fill such a large proportion of the lanes of OG/WC 100/200/400m final s. That is both peculiar and interesting. Conversely, and for exactly the same reason, related to this is the very interesting topic of sprinters that are other-than of west-african origin. One such group are those pale/white sprinters which mrbowie takes an interest in. These seem to have been competitive in the past. Other interesting questions: Can east africans compete at 200-400 ? (can Rudisha win a 400m medal ? , yes it can ! ok, im off on a tangent) ,Why are they not ? Can China compete at events in the 100-800m range ? Can they compete in the lj and tj ? Why has India not produced anything close to a Milkah Singh in the last 50 years ? Why does Brazil not have a sub3min 4X4 every year ? Are these observations and questions a gordian knot and simply inscrutable to you ? These seem like natural and reasonable questions to a T&F fan. You dont have to be a misanthrope to ask (just like you dont have to be a misanthrope to forbid their being asked). You can actually love and admire all people and still ask these questions.
user4
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Marlow » Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:38 am

user4 wrote:
Marlow wrote:If the discussion were about the tendencies of west central African ethnic sprinters vs, northern European ethnic sprinters, I would totally agree that the former have genetic superiority, on average, over the latter in terms of sprinting. .

1. I think it is curious that athletes of largely west african ancestry fill such a large proportion of the lanes of OG/WC 100/200/400m final s.
2. Are these observations and questions a gordian knot and simply inscrutable to you ?

1. Curious? I just addressed it above.
2. Inscrutable? I just addressed it above.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21082
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Daisy » Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:52 am

We heard from Brutal. What does Texas have to add?

In 2007, Texas wrote:When we see such a small % of a population totally dominating something, it's makes ya curious. It's not like we see a few more black athletes than whites. We see 99.9% black in some athletic events/positions. What it's not cool to wonder ...why?


In reply, Justin Clouder wrote:Please define "black" and "white" in as you understand it. Are lily-skinned rednecks with 20% black ancestry white? Is a dark-skinned man with two light-skinned grandparents black, or white? What about people with one light and one dark skinned parent? Is there a difference between light brown-skinned people and deep ebony-skinned people? What does it take to be counted as "black" or "white" in this discussion? Just one drop? One parent? One grandparent?Define the terms in a coherent way and the debate becomes interesting. Until then it is simply racist.


viewtopic.php?p=403389#p403389
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby batonless relay » Fri Mar 29, 2013 8:58 am

Justin Clouder hits the nail on the head.
batonless relay
 
Posts: 700
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 9:40 am

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Pego » Fri Mar 29, 2013 12:26 pm

Marlow wrote:But as you know, there is never just one truth.


Never? No objective knowledge ever :shock: ?

(Sorry for a delayed response, I am slow at discovering these things :wink: ).
Pego
 
Posts: 10198
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Marlow » Fri Mar 29, 2013 4:00 pm

Pego wrote:
Marlow wrote:But as you know, there is never just one truth.

Never? No objective knowledge ever :shock: ?

Just look at history and all the 'objective knowledge' they were sure they knew. This is little doubt that the current model of how matter exists (sub-atomic particles, quantum physics, etc.) will be replaced by something far more sophisticated in the future (a unified field theory chief among them). If we can't even know the truth of how (and more importantly, WHY) matter exists, what CAN we be sure of??!!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21082
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby user4 » Fri Mar 29, 2013 4:06 pm

Pego wrote:
Marlow wrote:But as you know, there is never just one truth.


Never? No objective knowledge ever :shock: ?

(Sorry for a delayed response, I am slow at discovering these things :wink: ).


if so then is it the only truth ?, .. ever ?
user4
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Daisy » Fri Mar 29, 2013 4:44 pm

Marlow wrote: If we can't even know the truth of how (and more importantly, WHY) matter exists, what CAN we be sure of??!!

Well you're setting a pretty high bar for any truth if we have to know the WHY first.

Do you have to know all truth to know some truth? Is it not true that matter is made up of sub-atomic particles?
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby user4 » Fri Mar 29, 2013 4:49 pm

Daisy wrote:
Marlow wrote: If we can't even know the truth of how (and more importantly, WHY) matter exists, what CAN we be sure of??!!

Well you're setting a pretty high bar for any truth if we have to know the WHY first.

Do you have to know all truth to know some truth? Is it not true that matter is made up of sub-atomic particles?


what is a particle and why :) ..
user4
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Daisy » Fri Mar 29, 2013 5:01 pm

user4 wrote:what is a particle and why :) ..

Do we we need to know to see if it's subatomic? We can embrace our ignorance and still know something. ;)
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Pego » Fri Mar 29, 2013 6:19 pm

Marlow wrote:
Pego wrote:
Marlow wrote:But as you know, there is never just one truth.

Never? No objective knowledge ever :shock: ?

Just look at history and all the 'objective knowledge' they were sure they knew. This is little doubt that the current model of how matter exists (sub-atomic particles, quantum physics, etc.) will be replaced by something far more sophisticated in the future (a unified field theory chief among them). If we can't even know the truth of how (and more importantly, WHY) matter exists, what CAN we be sure of??!!


I did not say "all".
You said "none."
Pego
 
Posts: 10198
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Marlow » Fri Mar 29, 2013 7:19 pm

Pego wrote:I did not say "all".
You said "none."

I'm of the mind (word-play?!) that human consciousness, in all its infinite (well, 7 billion right now) varieties, fundamentally bends all truths to its own ability to understand. Our knowledge of the what (and yes, how and why) matter is, IS indeed the basis for ALL truth. :shock:
Marlow
 
Posts: 21082
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby user4 » Sat Mar 30, 2013 5:08 am

Pego, I think Marlow is trying, for the second time, to tell you that he has discovered the Truth.
user4
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Marlow » Sat Mar 30, 2013 5:19 am

user4 wrote:Pego, I think Marlow is trying, for the second time, to tell you that he has discovered the Truth.

ZACKLY! :D
Marlow
 
Posts: 21082
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Pego » Sat Mar 30, 2013 5:35 am

Marlow wrote:
user4 wrote:Pego, I think Marlow is trying, for the second time, to tell you that he has discovered the Truth.

ZACKLY! :D


Ain't metaphysics grand? Any mental gymnastics passes for a revealed light :roll: .
Pego
 
Posts: 10198
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Marlow » Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:12 am

Pego wrote:Ain't metaphysics grand? Any mental gymnastics passes for a revealed light :roll: .

Since when is physics, metaphysics? You're the only looking for a single verifiable 'truth'. I'm just saying we ain't there yet (ever?).
Marlow
 
Posts: 21082
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby kuha » Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:52 am

Marlow wrote:
Pego wrote:Ain't metaphysics grand? Any mental gymnastics passes for a revealed light :roll: .

Since when is physics, metaphysics? You're the only looking for a single verifiable 'truth'. I'm just saying we ain't there yet (ever?).


:roll:
kuha
 
Posts: 9016
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Pego » Sat Mar 30, 2013 6:58 am

Marlow wrote:
Pego wrote:Ain't metaphysics grand? Any mental gymnastics passes for a revealed light :roll: .

Since when is physics, metaphysics? You're the only looking for a single verifiable 'truth'. I'm just saying we ain't there yet (ever?).


So, if I say "Marlow is a TOE in Jacksonville", it is subject to individual interpretation? That is not a fact?
Pego
 
Posts: 10198
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Daisy » Sat Mar 30, 2013 7:17 am

Only a TOE if you look. He could be anything when you're not looking.
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby kuha » Sat Mar 30, 2013 8:58 am

Daisy wrote:Only a TOE if you look. He could be anything when you're not looking.


Schroedinger's Toe.

By the way, the Sophists are calling; they want their arguments back.
kuha
 
Posts: 9016
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: 3rd row, on the finish line

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby user4 » Sat Mar 30, 2013 9:37 am

Marlow wrote:
Pego wrote:Ain't metaphysics grand? Any mental gymnastics passes for a revealed light :roll: .

Since when is physics, metaphysics? You're the only looking for a single verifiable 'truth'. I'm just saying we ain't there yet (ever?).


That is a major back pedal from what you said before. I mean if you are really such an accomplished philosopher you certainly did not change your mind that quickly... or did you ?

question for Pego: What is a TOE?
user4
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Daisy » Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:24 am

user4 wrote:What is a TOE?

Teacher of English
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby user4 » Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:26 am

Daisy wrote:
user4 wrote:What is a TOE?

Teacher of English
ok, everything makes perfect sense then.
user4
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Daisy » Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:27 am

kuha wrote:By the way, the Sophists are calling; they want their arguments back.

At least he's not charging us for these pearls of wisdom. :)
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby user4 » Sat Mar 30, 2013 10:55 am

Daisy wrote:
kuha wrote:By the way, the Sophists are calling; they want their arguments back.

At least he's not charging us for these pearls of wisdom. :)

where did you go to get your 5min back ?
Last edited by user4 on Sat Mar 30, 2013 1:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
user4
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Daisy » Sat Mar 30, 2013 11:26 am

user4 wrote:
Daisy wrote:
kuha wrote:By the way, the Sophists are calling; they want their arguments back.

At least he's not charging us for these pearls of wisdom. :)

where did you go to get your 5min back ?

Think of it this way, it was this thread or 'Fitted Kitchens in Huddersfield'
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby bambam » Sat Mar 30, 2013 2:10 pm

In keeping with where this thread has gone, how about this philosophical gem:

If a tree falls in the forest, and there is nobody there to hear it - is the husband still wrong?
bambam
 
Posts: 3848
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Durham, NC

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby user4 » Sat Mar 30, 2013 2:47 pm

bambam wrote:In keeping with where this thread has gone, how about this philosophical gem:

If a tree falls in the forest, and there is nobody there to hear it - is the husband still wrong?


only if he is out picking choice timber for his hobby shop in instead of fetching firewood.
user4
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Marlow » Sat Mar 30, 2013 3:13 pm

So I spend the day in the blazing sun, officiating the UNF PV comps and I come back to this intellectual disrespect??!! I like it! :D Anyone that takes any of this hoohah seriously needs a check-up from the neck-up!
Marlow
 
Posts: 21082
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby user4 » Sat Mar 30, 2013 3:31 pm

Marlow wrote:.. I like it! :D

you may not be a philosopher but you are a good man!
user4
 
Posts: 1434
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 1:05 pm

Re: Pale Sprinters

Postby Marlow » Sat Mar 30, 2013 5:49 pm

user4 wrote:
Marlow wrote:.. I like it! :D

you are a good man!

But . . . is that an objective fact . . . or merely a shadow of the truth . . . :wink:
Marlow
 
Posts: 21082
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: JumboElliott and 8 guests