IT
  
Attualmente si sta visualizzando la versione Italy del sito.
Volete passare al vostro sito locale?
84 TEMPO DI LETTURA MIN

Science v. Subjectivity

If you are not familiar with how college football determines the four teams that are picked to contend for the national championship, I refer you to the Selection Committee Protocol which is a guide on how the committee chooses the four playoff teams at the end of the regular season and after the league championship games. The first words of the protocol are telling: “Ranking football teams is an art, not a science.” The protocol specifically calls into question any rigorous mathematical approach: “Nuanced mathematical formulas ignore some teams who ‘deserve’ to be selected.” Deserve?

So what are the guidelines that instruct the 13- member college playoff panel? They are somewhat obvious and include “conference championship wins, strength of schedule, head-to-head competition, comparative outcomes of common opponents, and other relevant factors such as key injuries that may have affected a team’s performance during the season or likely will affect its postseason performance.” I hasten to point out that strength of schedule can only be determined by “nuanced mathematical” rigor. The guidelines fall into two categories: facts (e.g., conference champions) and opinions (e.g., whether a key injury will impact team performance). My argument is to eliminate opinions and choose the final 4 teams in the most rational and unbiased fashion—that is, use computer algorithms. Exceptions to the computer rankings could be made by the committee when facts like conference championships play an important role.

Sbloccate questo articolo e molto altro con
Si può godere di:
Godetevi questa edizione per intero
Accesso immediato a oltre 600 titoli
Migliaia di numeri arretrati
Nessun contratto o impegno
Prova per €1.09
ABBONATI ORA
30 giorni di accesso, poi solo €11,99 / mese. Disdetta in qualsiasi momento. Solo per i nuovi abbonati.


Per saperne di più
Pocketmags Plus
Pocketmags Plus

Questo articolo è...


View Issues
Skeptic
22.1
VISUALIZZA IN NEGOZIO

Altri articoli in questo numero


Skeptic
About the Skeptics Society
The Skeptics Society is a nonprofit 501 (c)(3) educational
COLUMNS
The SkepDoc
Functional Medicine: Pseudoscientific Silliness
The Gadfly
The Multi-headed Hydra of Prejudice
CONTRIBUTORS
Michelle E. Ainsworth holds an MA in history. She enjoys
ARTICLE
Miraculous Water is Just Bad Science
Why Zamzam Water is Not a Valid Medical Treatment
Disturbing Trends in Lone Wolf Terrorism
The Convergence of Mental Illness, Marginality, and Cyber Radicalism
Torturing Data in the Name of Nonsense
Spiritualism began more than 150 years ago with the
An Outbreak of Mass Hallucinations and Shoddy Journalism
Why We Need Skepticism More Than Ever
SKEPTIC’S SCIENCE DIALOGUES
Bill Nye the Science Guy in Conversation with Michael Shermer
Bill Nye the Science Guy in Conversation with Michael
What Would it Take to Change Your Mind?
I’ve been writing about and teaching critical thinking
ET v. Earth Pathogens
The Andromeda Strain or War of the Worlds— Will ETs Kill Us or Vice Versa?
Trouble in the Multiverse
I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum
REVIEWS
Out of the Loop, Lost in the Maze
The Stealth Determinism of Westworld
Back to the Future and Forward to the Past
A review of Time Travel: A History
Cosmic Consciousness and the Ptolemaic Principle
A review of You Are the Universe: Discovering Your Cosmic Self and Why it Matters
Science International
A review of Courting Science: Securing the Foundation for a Second American Century by Damon V. Coletta
Conjuring Magic
Reviews of Conjuring Asia: Magic, Orientalism and the Making of the Modern World by Chris Goto-Jones and Making Magic: Religion, Magic, and Science in the Modern World
JUNIOR SKEPTIC
An Easy Guide to Baloney Detection!
In this special issue of JunIor SkepTIc we’ll learn