I remember my sociology textbook explaining that sports often show what a group values.
Of course that’s what the sociology textbook will say. Otherwise what’s the point of sociology?
In particular I think that being a rationalist means that you can choose a sport based on it’s merits instead on the values it’s projects.
What do we want? -A low rate of accidents -Cardiovascular benefits -Muscle development -Coordination and control over muscles. -Social interaction -Developing confidence
That calls for a poll. I take the freedom to add some points to your list.
In the poll below don’t assume that all attributes must fit to a single sport but instead might be matched by a set of sports. Best not to imagine a specific sports idea but rather what you require of proposals here.
Rationalist sports should...
have a low rate of accidents [pollid:707]
have cardiovascular benefits [pollid:708]
aid muscle development [pollid:709]
train muscle and motion control [pollid:710]
include social interaction [pollid:711]
help develop confidence [pollid:712]
include mental tasks [pollid:713]
be easy to learn [pollid:714]
be fun [pollid:715]
improve balance [pollid:716]
train reflexes [pollid:717]
useful for self-defense [pollid:718]
train spatial navigation [pollid:719]
use multi tasking [pollid:720]
be pleasant for spectators [pollid:721]
contain pauses [pollid:722]
have a duration of X minutes [pollid:723]
And for the sceptics:
The whole idea of a physical rationalist sport is bullshit [pollid:724]
The whole idea of a mental rationalist sport is bullshit [pollid:725]
Maybe we’re trying to solve too many problems at the same time. In analogy with Purchase Fuzzies and Utilons Separately, I’d guess that the activity that best promotes physical fitness isn’t the activity that best trains transferable skills isn’t the activity that is the most fun, so spending some time on something intended to improve physical fitness, some time on something intended to train transferable skills and some time on something intended to be fun is probably better than spending a lot of time on something that haphazardly tries to achieve all three. (Also, which activity is best for a given goal is likely to vary from person to person, so beware of other-optimizing.)
Training in organized sport often gives you the benefit of increasing physical fitness, even if it isn’t the core of that particular sport. I play baseball and some part of our training is increasing our general fitness, even if we don’t particularly need that in the field.
Apart from that, I think you might be on to something.
I couldn’t vote on any of these because it’s going to depend on each individual and what they need from sports. I might want to play sports for the exercise value, but others might already have an exercise routine in place and they’d want it e.g. for the relaxation value. I might need it to be fun and easy to learn or I won’t end up doing it, while the more competitive amongst us might require lots of competition and/or lots of spectators to cheer them on.
Of course that’s what the sociology textbook will say. Otherwise what’s the point of sociology?
In particular I think that being a rationalist means that you can choose a sport based on it’s merits instead on the values it’s projects.
What do we want?
-A low rate of accidents
-Cardiovascular benefits
-Muscle development
-Coordination and control over muscles.
-Social interaction
-Developing confidence
That calls for a poll. I take the freedom to add some points to your list.
In the poll below don’t assume that all attributes must fit to a single sport but instead might be matched by a set of sports. Best not to imagine a specific sports idea but rather what you require of proposals here.
Rationalist sports should...
have a low rate of accidents [pollid:707]
have cardiovascular benefits [pollid:708]
aid muscle development [pollid:709]
train muscle and motion control [pollid:710]
include social interaction [pollid:711]
help develop confidence [pollid:712]
include mental tasks [pollid:713]
be easy to learn [pollid:714]
be fun [pollid:715]
improve balance [pollid:716]
train reflexes [pollid:717]
useful for self-defense [pollid:718]
train spatial navigation [pollid:719]
use multi tasking [pollid:720]
be pleasant for spectators [pollid:721]
contain pauses [pollid:722]
have a duration of X minutes [pollid:723]
And for the sceptics:
The whole idea of a physical rationalist sport is bullshit [pollid:724]
The whole idea of a mental rationalist sport is bullshit [pollid:725]
Maybe we’re trying to solve too many problems at the same time. In analogy with Purchase Fuzzies and Utilons Separately, I’d guess that the activity that best promotes physical fitness isn’t the activity that best trains transferable skills isn’t the activity that is the most fun, so spending some time on something intended to improve physical fitness, some time on something intended to train transferable skills and some time on something intended to be fun is probably better than spending a lot of time on something that haphazardly tries to achieve all three. (Also, which activity is best for a given goal is likely to vary from person to person, so beware of other-optimizing.)
Training in organized sport often gives you the benefit of increasing physical fitness, even if it isn’t the core of that particular sport. I play baseball and some part of our training is increasing our general fitness, even if we don’t particularly need that in the field.
Apart from that, I think you might be on to something.
I couldn’t vote on any of these because it’s going to depend on each individual and what they need from sports. I might want to play sports for the exercise value, but others might already have an exercise routine in place and they’d want it e.g. for the relaxation value. I might need it to be fun and easy to learn or I won’t end up doing it, while the more competitive amongst us might require lots of competition and/or lots of spectators to cheer them on.