Symposium: Defending Objectivity

Since I’m only responding to John’s post now, I will do a line-by-line response.

John says:
“The “objective” judgments he mentions, that involve thinking “hard and rationally” (as if subjective judgments don’t), are: “You could say that Movie A’s theme was better developed than Movie B’s, or that the dialogue in Movie A was less meaningful than the dialogue in Movie B.” Ok, what if I think Movie A’s theme was better developed and you think Movie B’s was? How do we resolve this supposedly “objective” dispute?”

The Sports Revolution: The Wall-Less Stadium

Let me set the scene for you: A very strong, and fairly slow, man is at the plate. He swings his bat and breaks it as the ball flares out to left field. It goes over the fence for a home run.

Let me reset the scene for you: That very strong, and fairly slow, man is at the plate. He swings his bat and breaks it as the ball flares out to left field. The ball is either caught by the left fielder or keeps rolling, because there is no fence in left field.

Take a trip back to baseball’s past. The game was first played on large, boundary-less fields. Home runs were achieved only when you could circle the bases before the defense got the ball back in. Every home run was an inside-the-park home run.