Further now to my original follow up post:
Nick was kind enough to lend me Tom Holland's Persian Fire. It had quite an interesting account of the origin of Athenian democracy (pp.128-41). I still haven't got a clear overall timeline of the period, but it seems democracy evolved before Athen's naval power - which was engineered by Themistocles. Nonetheless, this doesn't invalidate my conjecture. The people were capable to standing up for themselves, and did so to secure the freedoms promised by Cleisthenes. Further, it is clear that aristocrats weren't too keen on naval developments, which seemed to threaten to maintain and even extend the importance of the demos.
I also got hold of Linda Colley's Britons. The reference to Bamford is on p.318, and her reference leads me to Life of a Radical page 19. Again, slightly unfortunately, there's little if any sign of the justification I want - it seems militia lists are justified as a practical record. However, there's no objection that, for example, they don't include women - it seems implicit that men who fight are the relevant voters. Further Colley goes on to cite William Cobbett, who does argue that the labourers of Britain are both responsible for its wealth and defence. It's not clear from what she quotes, but she writes (still p.318) "if all adult men were worthy to fight for Great Britain, then surely they had the right to take part in its politics as well? Cobbett certainly thought so".
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Andorra 0-3 England
Not exactly convincing. Why isn't Gerrard captain? Despite scoring two and making the third for Defoe (who I guess counts as the final assist, after Nugent's tap in), I bet he'll be stuck outside again when Fat Lamps is back...
Oxford College Choice
A friend just asked me for advice for a friend of his on picking Oxford colleges. I thought I'd post my reply (slightly modified) here, since a) it may bring me traffic via Google searches and b) may then help someone (see, Adam Smith may have been right about the benefits of self-interest):
College choice is a tough one. It certainly *does* matter, they're not just halls of residence.
In terms of the Norrington table, the fact that some colleges do consistently well is probably due in part to having good applicants to choose from and in part to better facilities. At the poorer colleges, you may find you get more teaching from graduate students, or even fewer tutorials - not to mention the college library probably won't be as well-stocked and you're unlikely to be able to get as much money off the college.
It's worth considering things like not only the college's overall place but their reputation in the specific subject - e.g. Jesus (my college) seems to have been consistently good at chemistry in the time I've been here - and who the tutors are/what their interests are (though perhaps consider that a top professor won't necessarily spend his/her time teaching the undergrads even in their own college). Since teaching and admissions are mostly college-based, the tutors and their interests can be very important.
And also, don't just think academically. Think about the general atmosphere of the college - Do you want to be surrounded by public school boys? Rowers? Union hacks? (Or are you one of these people?) Would you prefer a larger college or a smaller one (which can be a friendly family or claustrophobic, depending on your attitude)?
In my case, the fact I looked at Jesus first was totally random really. It looked ok though, and crucially offered three years of accommodation. I did compare it to some others - some of which also offered accommodation - but none seemed clearly better, so here I am.
Finance-wise, it's good to consider not only availability of accommodation, but price, recent rent increases, amount of scholarships, any grants (even undergrads in Jesus can get money for books, travel and sport - don't know how it compares to elsewhere), food, etc.
I hope that's some help. At the end of the day though, while it certainly matters (makes a difference), almost everyone ends up happy wherever they end up (even 2nd choice colleges), so if you're unsure it probably isn't worth agonizing over - these are just things to take into account.
(Related link: my advice for getting into Oxbridge, admissions and interviews here)
College choice is a tough one. It certainly *does* matter, they're not just halls of residence.
In terms of the Norrington table, the fact that some colleges do consistently well is probably due in part to having good applicants to choose from and in part to better facilities. At the poorer colleges, you may find you get more teaching from graduate students, or even fewer tutorials - not to mention the college library probably won't be as well-stocked and you're unlikely to be able to get as much money off the college.
It's worth considering things like not only the college's overall place but their reputation in the specific subject - e.g. Jesus (my college) seems to have been consistently good at chemistry in the time I've been here - and who the tutors are/what their interests are (though perhaps consider that a top professor won't necessarily spend his/her time teaching the undergrads even in their own college). Since teaching and admissions are mostly college-based, the tutors and their interests can be very important.
And also, don't just think academically. Think about the general atmosphere of the college - Do you want to be surrounded by public school boys? Rowers? Union hacks? (Or are you one of these people?) Would you prefer a larger college or a smaller one (which can be a friendly family or claustrophobic, depending on your attitude)?
In my case, the fact I looked at Jesus first was totally random really. It looked ok though, and crucially offered three years of accommodation. I did compare it to some others - some of which also offered accommodation - but none seemed clearly better, so here I am.
Finance-wise, it's good to consider not only availability of accommodation, but price, recent rent increases, amount of scholarships, any grants (even undergrads in Jesus can get money for books, travel and sport - don't know how it compares to elsewhere), food, etc.
I hope that's some help. At the end of the day though, while it certainly matters (makes a difference), almost everyone ends up happy wherever they end up (even 2nd choice colleges), so if you're unsure it probably isn't worth agonizing over - these are just things to take into account.
(Related link: my advice for getting into Oxbridge, admissions and interviews here)
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
One Vote Per Issue (Bleg)
I'm trying to describe a possible voting system that gives people one vote per issue, but lets them divide those votes as they wish over a number of different issues. E.g., if we face votes on policies A, B, C, D and E then I get five votes – so if I care very strongly about D, marginally about B and not much about the other three, then I may cast four of my votes for D, one against B and effectively have no vote on A, C or E. This gives some crude measure of intensity – my strength of feeling for D is shown by the fact I am willing to give up my vote on A to have more influence on D.
I've heard people suggest such before, but I'm stuck for a name to call it. Firstly, if anyone reading happens to know of any reference that discusses such, I'd be very grateful - but, more modestly, if anyone already knows this by a certain name, or can suggest a snappy and appropriate one, I'd love to hear from you...
I've heard people suggest such before, but I'm stuck for a name to call it. Firstly, if anyone reading happens to know of any reference that discusses such, I'd be very grateful - but, more modestly, if anyone already knows this by a certain name, or can suggest a snappy and appropriate one, I'd love to hear from you...
Monday, March 26, 2007
Force of the Majority
Following my earlier post, Robert Poole was kind enough to send me the following reply:
The episode you mention was Samuel Bamford at the Crown & Anchor meeting of 22 Jan 1817. Linda Colley mentions it in Britons, using Bamford's Passages in the Life of a Radical [links]. Cobbett's account is in Cobbett's Weekly Political Pamphlet, 22 Feb. 1817, although looking back at the Register he seems to have been persuaded of the case in general in November 1816.
Time to head to the archives I guess... (His article in Past and Present 192 may also be worth me looking at, if I get time)
Nick was also kind enough to comment, suggesting I could even end up citing Foucault in my thesis!
The episode you mention was Samuel Bamford at the Crown & Anchor meeting of 22 Jan 1817. Linda Colley mentions it in Britons, using Bamford's Passages in the Life of a Radical [links]. Cobbett's account is in Cobbett's Weekly Political Pamphlet, 22 Feb. 1817, although looking back at the Register he seems to have been persuaded of the case in general in November 1816.
Time to head to the archives I guess... (His article in Past and Present 192 may also be worth me looking at, if I get time)
Nick was also kind enough to comment, suggesting I could even end up citing Foucault in my thesis!
Saturday, March 24, 2007
England Inquest
I didn't watch today's dire 0-0 draw with Israel, but nonetheless want to add an uninformed opinion...
I thought it was well known that Phil Neville should never play for England again. I'd have played Carra on the right - where he could have offered a bit more going forward - and Barry at left-back. (Or I'd consider calling up Steven Warnock, if we're so short on the left - but some will say that's just Liverpool bias talking).
Obviously the full-backs we had were never going to give us great width going forward, but we should have been able to produce more with the players we did have. I think we're missing Joe Cole or even Scholes for that creativity. While Gerrard and even Lampard are good 'attacking' midfielders, they're goal-scorers not creative.
I'd hope to see Gerrard and Lampard in the middle - probably with Lennon and Downing - against Andorra. We shouldn't need a holding midfielder there.
I thought it was well known that Phil Neville should never play for England again. I'd have played Carra on the right - where he could have offered a bit more going forward - and Barry at left-back. (Or I'd consider calling up Steven Warnock, if we're so short on the left - but some will say that's just Liverpool bias talking).
Obviously the full-backs we had were never going to give us great width going forward, but we should have been able to produce more with the players we did have. I think we're missing Joe Cole or even Scholes for that creativity. While Gerrard and even Lampard are good 'attacking' midfielders, they're goal-scorers not creative.
I'd hope to see Gerrard and Lampard in the middle - probably with Lennon and Downing - against Andorra. We shouldn't need a holding midfielder there.
Sports Day
Today, after the conclusion of the rights conference, I went to meet up with John William and some of his friends for what was billed as a department social - in fact, at least one of the other four wasn't in politics, and the other three were non-theorists I didn't know either.
We played tennis (badly), then touch rugby (also badly - though I did score one try). I know I'll be stiff now...
We played tennis (badly), then touch rugby (also badly - though I did score one try). I know I'll be stiff now...
Friday, March 23, 2007
Claims of Rights
Today I attended a conference-type gathering at the Maison Francaise as part of an inter-disciplinary workshop on re-thinking democracy 1750-1850. It was a rather exploratory look at the way rights language was used - pro- and anti-democracy - in Britain and France during these periods.
Not being a historian, I found some of it not particularly interesting - partly no doubt because the significance of minor details about a period where you don't know the context can easily be missed. Also a few French delegates spoke mainly in French - I was surprised I could still follow the gist of some of it, but in the end decided it wasn't worth the effort of trying to follow.
There were several comments that did interest me though, and it was somewhat frustrating that with people only giving 10 minute talks - often about what they hoped to look at rather than had found - there wasn't always opportunity to follow this up. The most immediately relevant for me, however, was Robert Poole, who was talking about calls for reform in northern England 1816-7. He said some had called for universal manhood suffrage, based on militia lists, rather than restricting the vote to tax-payers.
Just last week, I made the following conjecture in my thesis:
Perhaps one reason for thinking it ‘natural’, or even ‘necessary’, that the majority get their way is to move from the physical force of greater numbers to their moral force. Of course, it is often said to be illegitimate to move simply from an ‘is’ to an ‘ought’[1]; however it is plausible to think that majority rule might have arisen out of peaceful conflict resolution. While Clausewitz famously said “war is nothing but a continuation of political intercourse”[2], the more likely truth is that politics (in the form of civilised debate and voting) is a continuation of war, by other means. Disagreements were resolved by physical conflict long before they were resolved by what we would regard as civilised politics and, although it is somewhat fanciful, it is all too easy to imagine generals of opposing sides were often able to realize who was better placed to win the battle, and where the outcome was predictable in advance it would make sense for the one on the likely losing side to defer without battle – to surrender without bloodshed, rather than fight to defeat or death.
This interpretation was certainly endorsed by Henry Thoreau, who claimed “the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest”[3]. It also explains why the extent of the franchise was often somehow related to military service. This would be why the vote as restricted to men (rather than women), and even sometimes the rich – who could afford their own armour, and hence made better soldiers[4]. The vote was granted, at first, only to those who could contribute to military victory. Even in the modern world, the role of women in aiding the war effort – albeit in the factories, rather than the frontline – was, I think, significant in winning female suffrage. Of course, the relationship would only be contingent – majorities do not always win battles, especially if their opponents are better trained or equipped. More significantly, if majority rule originated on the battlefield – with ‘who has the larger army’ a proxy for ‘who is more likely to win anyway, if it comes to fighting’ – then its normative status is less clear. We do not normally suppose ‘might makes right’, or that the strong should get their way simply because they are stronger, so why should we accept majorities simply for this reason?[5]
The footnotes aren't finished, but I have some cases cited by Aristotle for number four - where those who fought for Athens were granted citizenship, not to mention the widely-held view that democracy owed its development to the need for manpower in the navy compared to states like Sparta that relied on few well-trained and equipped troops (e.g. 300). If I can find references for these demands, then I think that will help back up my case significantly.
[1] Hume
[2] C. von Clausewitz On War VIII vi. Wordworth Classics edition (trans J. J. Graham, revised F. N. Maude) p.357. C.f. I i 24, 26 (Wordsworth pp.22-3)
[3] H. D. Thoreau (1993 [1849]) ‘Civil Disobedience’ in P. Smith (ed.) Civil Disobedience and Other Essays (Dover) p.2.
[4] I have some Greek examples mentioned in Aristotle.
[5] Rawls (1999 [1971]) p.116 “it is to avoid the appeal to force and cunning that the principles of right and justice are accepted. Thus I assume that to each according to his threat advantage is not a conception of justice”. [See Rob's sub-heading]
UPDATE: Follow up to this here.
Not being a historian, I found some of it not particularly interesting - partly no doubt because the significance of minor details about a period where you don't know the context can easily be missed. Also a few French delegates spoke mainly in French - I was surprised I could still follow the gist of some of it, but in the end decided it wasn't worth the effort of trying to follow.
There were several comments that did interest me though, and it was somewhat frustrating that with people only giving 10 minute talks - often about what they hoped to look at rather than had found - there wasn't always opportunity to follow this up. The most immediately relevant for me, however, was Robert Poole, who was talking about calls for reform in northern England 1816-7. He said some had called for universal manhood suffrage, based on militia lists, rather than restricting the vote to tax-payers.
Just last week, I made the following conjecture in my thesis:
Perhaps one reason for thinking it ‘natural’, or even ‘necessary’, that the majority get their way is to move from the physical force of greater numbers to their moral force. Of course, it is often said to be illegitimate to move simply from an ‘is’ to an ‘ought’[1]; however it is plausible to think that majority rule might have arisen out of peaceful conflict resolution. While Clausewitz famously said “war is nothing but a continuation of political intercourse”[2], the more likely truth is that politics (in the form of civilised debate and voting) is a continuation of war, by other means. Disagreements were resolved by physical conflict long before they were resolved by what we would regard as civilised politics and, although it is somewhat fanciful, it is all too easy to imagine generals of opposing sides were often able to realize who was better placed to win the battle, and where the outcome was predictable in advance it would make sense for the one on the likely losing side to defer without battle – to surrender without bloodshed, rather than fight to defeat or death.
This interpretation was certainly endorsed by Henry Thoreau, who claimed “the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest”[3]. It also explains why the extent of the franchise was often somehow related to military service. This would be why the vote as restricted to men (rather than women), and even sometimes the rich – who could afford their own armour, and hence made better soldiers[4]. The vote was granted, at first, only to those who could contribute to military victory. Even in the modern world, the role of women in aiding the war effort – albeit in the factories, rather than the frontline – was, I think, significant in winning female suffrage. Of course, the relationship would only be contingent – majorities do not always win battles, especially if their opponents are better trained or equipped. More significantly, if majority rule originated on the battlefield – with ‘who has the larger army’ a proxy for ‘who is more likely to win anyway, if it comes to fighting’ – then its normative status is less clear. We do not normally suppose ‘might makes right’, or that the strong should get their way simply because they are stronger, so why should we accept majorities simply for this reason?[5]
The footnotes aren't finished, but I have some cases cited by Aristotle for number four - where those who fought for Athens were granted citizenship, not to mention the widely-held view that democracy owed its development to the need for manpower in the navy compared to states like Sparta that relied on few well-trained and equipped troops (e.g. 300). If I can find references for these demands, then I think that will help back up my case significantly.
[1] Hume
[2] C. von Clausewitz On War VIII vi. Wordworth Classics edition (trans J. J. Graham, revised F. N. Maude) p.357. C.f. I i 24, 26 (Wordsworth pp.22-3)
[3] H. D. Thoreau (1993 [1849]) ‘Civil Disobedience’ in P. Smith (ed.) Civil Disobedience and Other Essays (Dover) p.2.
[4] I have some Greek examples mentioned in Aristotle.
[5] Rawls (1999 [1971]) p.116 “it is to avoid the appeal to force and cunning that the principles of right and justice are accepted. Thus I assume that to each according to his threat advantage is not a conception of justice”. [See Rob's sub-heading]
UPDATE: Follow up to this here.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Lecture Lists
(Saddo alert) Trinity term lecture lists are available here. (Politics, philosophy)
I already knew the Pol Theory Grad Workshop would be Th. at 5 and the visiting speaker Research Seminar W. at 5. Other highlights include the continuation of G. A. Cohen's 'Aspects of Justice Lectures' (same time and place - T. at 11) and Parfit's 'Climbing the Mountain' seminars (W. 2:15-4, from week 2).
I already knew the Pol Theory Grad Workshop would be Th. at 5 and the visiting speaker Research Seminar W. at 5. Other highlights include the continuation of G. A. Cohen's 'Aspects of Justice Lectures' (same time and place - T. at 11) and Parfit's 'Climbing the Mountain' seminars (W. 2:15-4, from week 2).
Follow Up: Lunch in Mansfield and Contemporary Egalitarianism
Further to two earlier posts...
Today I had lunch in Mansfield SCR with Joel. It was very impressive - although I always feel slightly awkward eating in such circumstances (I refused after lunch cheese and crackers because it meant reaching across someone and wine too). We didn't really discuss next term's teaching plans, but we did mostly talk about Oxford, academia, teaching and so on more generally, so it was useful in that respect.
While I was in town, I went to the SSL and had a look at the book I'd recently ordered from the stack. The Christiano paper is indeed (a descendant of) the one I've read - I recall the section on Nozick (which is pp.64-70) being quite useful. I only read the introduction, which wasn't quite what I was expecting. I thought it would describe the real cutting edge of a debate I'm a bit behind on. Instead it largely summarized events since 1971 - equality of what, levelling down, etc - but it was a good overview of such. It didn't really summarize the papers in the volume, but it did at least highlight where they enter the debates. Also being in the department allowed me to see Alia, Rob, John William and - entering as I was leaving (7pm) - Kieran, so at least it was a bit more sociable than many days recently.
Today I had lunch in Mansfield SCR with Joel. It was very impressive - although I always feel slightly awkward eating in such circumstances (I refused after lunch cheese and crackers because it meant reaching across someone and wine too). We didn't really discuss next term's teaching plans, but we did mostly talk about Oxford, academia, teaching and so on more generally, so it was useful in that respect.
While I was in town, I went to the SSL and had a look at the book I'd recently ordered from the stack. The Christiano paper is indeed (a descendant of) the one I've read - I recall the section on Nozick (which is pp.64-70) being quite useful. I only read the introduction, which wasn't quite what I was expecting. I thought it would describe the real cutting edge of a debate I'm a bit behind on. Instead it largely summarized events since 1971 - equality of what, levelling down, etc - but it was a good overview of such. It didn't really summarize the papers in the volume, but it did at least highlight where they enter the debates. Also being in the department allowed me to see Alia, Rob, John William and - entering as I was leaving (7pm) - Kieran, so at least it was a bit more sociable than many days recently.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Post-Doc Opportunities
As I said, I'm aiming to have a reasonably presentable draft of about half my thesis done by the start of next term. The other half should be written over the summer, with Michaelmas devoted to tidying things up and applying for jobs and such, the aim being to submit by around Christmas. Obviously this is all a bit tentative at this stage, and things may change, but while I'm feeling in a 'writing up' mood I've already started giving some thought to what comes next. (Obviously attempting to get a publication or two would help my options, but time is tight).
Current details are for 2007, where the deadlines are now passed, but this is a reminder for next year - when hopefully I'll finish just ahead of these deadlines:
The Leverhume Trust say "[a]pproximately 50 [Early Career] Fellowships to be offered in 2007. Application materials will be available from 2 January 2007"
The British Academy expect "that up to 37 Postdoctoral Fellowships in the humanities and social sciences will be available in this year’s competition. In recent years the strength of competition for the available awards has been intense. The success rate last year was 5.4%, when 593 applications were received and only 32 awards could be made. There is every reason to expect the strength of competition to be as fierce in 2007 as in other recent years." Their application deadline was 28th February. Notes here.
Of course, even if I do finish on time, unless I have more success finding a temporary job for next year I'll probably be sat around unemployed between submission and the following September...
Current details are for 2007, where the deadlines are now passed, but this is a reminder for next year - when hopefully I'll finish just ahead of these deadlines:
The Leverhume Trust say "[a]pproximately 50 [Early Career] Fellowships to be offered in 2007. Application materials will be available from 2 January 2007"
The British Academy expect "that up to 37 Postdoctoral Fellowships in the humanities and social sciences will be available in this year’s competition. In recent years the strength of competition for the available awards has been intense. The success rate last year was 5.4%, when 593 applications were received and only 32 awards could be made. There is every reason to expect the strength of competition to be as fierce in 2007 as in other recent years." Their application deadline was 28th February. Notes here.
Of course, even if I do finish on time, unless I have more success finding a temporary job for next year I'll probably be sat around unemployed between submission and the following September...
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Productive Day
Well, maybe today wasn't actually all that productive, but the key was that I finished several on-going projects, which made me feel a lot better about myself.
First, and probably most important, was a complete re-writing of chapter one of my thesis (8,229 words), which I emailed to my supervisor.
Secondly, I emailed a book note to Political Studies Review, on this. Those with full text access can monitor here, though it probably won't be in print until September (though I should, hopefully, have two in that issue).
Lastly, it was the fourth and final session of the Learning Institute class teaching seminars today. This was really a chance for people to raise questions/issues, and as I was one of only two who'd done so we got to spend a fair amount of time talking around the revision classes I'm giving next term. I don't think it's radically changed my ideas - I'll be basing the class around student essay plans - but it was helpful to bounce ideas around. Also at the end of the class I got talking to Joel - Theology Fellow at Mansfield - who also has to give revision classes next term. We agreed to have lunch on Thursday to exchange ideas.
First, and probably most important, was a complete re-writing of chapter one of my thesis (8,229 words), which I emailed to my supervisor.
Secondly, I emailed a book note to Political Studies Review, on this. Those with full text access can monitor here, though it probably won't be in print until September (though I should, hopefully, have two in that issue).
Lastly, it was the fourth and final session of the Learning Institute class teaching seminars today. This was really a chance for people to raise questions/issues, and as I was one of only two who'd done so we got to spend a fair amount of time talking around the revision classes I'm giving next term. I don't think it's radically changed my ideas - I'll be basing the class around student essay plans - but it was helpful to bounce ideas around. Also at the end of the class I got talking to Joel - Theology Fellow at Mansfield - who also has to give revision classes next term. We agreed to have lunch on Thursday to exchange ideas.
Egalitarianism
I volunteered to teach a visiting American undergraduate a course on political theory with special focus on egalitarianism next term. Though it's not my thesis area (which would be ideal, but unlikely) I figure it's something I already know plenty about, having sat through Jerry Cohen's Contemporary Political Philosophy graduate class three times in all now, and so being regularly exposed to Rawls, Dworkin, luck egalitarianism, etc.
I noitce a new collection of essays edited by Nils Holtug and Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen has recently come out - details, including contents, from Amazon or OUP. It looks like I may have to take a look to make sure I'm up-to-date. Hopefully this is the paper Tom Christiano sent me a draft of some time ago finally in print - it's about time, because I've already seen one fellow student give a presentation on it!
UPDATE: What I think (of the introduction) here.
I noitce a new collection of essays edited by Nils Holtug and Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen has recently come out - details, including contents, from Amazon or OUP. It looks like I may have to take a look to make sure I'm up-to-date. Hopefully this is the paper Tom Christiano sent me a draft of some time ago finally in print - it's about time, because I've already seen one fellow student give a presentation on it!
UPDATE: What I think (of the introduction) here.
Sunday, March 18, 2007
Aston Villa 0-0 Liverpool
Since it's the vac and the Sunday game is presumably on Sky I was half-tempted to head to a pub and watch. I'm glad I didn't, it was apparently a boring game of few chances. Too bad we couldn't capitalise on Arsenal slipping up (and yes, I was cheering Everton).
St Patrick's Parties
Well, despite being left home alone, I wasn't go to stay in and do nothing on St Patrick's day. I went to two parties: First my friend Leo invited me to a lawyer friend of his, who lives in the mock Jacobean Belsyre Court on Woodstock and Observatory Rd. It was a place I'd often been past, when I lived in Stevens Close, and they were fantastic flats - especially on the top floor because, although it was dark and windy, we got to go out on the roof and had a fantastic view of the whole of north Oxford. There was a real mix of people very, from very interesting different backgrounds, so I got to talk to a couple of people from publishing and one who works with film-scripts, as well as several students (including Jesus undergrads I'd never met).
I made my excuses soon after 11 because one of my friends from the department - Ian, who'd done the MPhil a year below me - was having what (despite his being Irish) was billed as a belated house-warming over on Osney Island (about the furthest west I've ever been in Oxford, despite being misnamed East Street). I was hoping to see several friends from the department that I haven't seen in a couple of weeks, but by the time I got there things were already surprisingly quite - half a dozen or so people sat around playing cards and drinking games. In the end, it was just me, Ian and Chris - another recent MPhil leaver - staying until around 2:30. What I caught probably wasn't so exciting or varied as Leo's party, but I quite like the low-key format - I'm not big on having to make lots of small talk with people I don't know. While neither were wild excesses of hedonism, both parties were interesting in different ways. And it certainly beats sitting around the flat alone!
I made my excuses soon after 11 because one of my friends from the department - Ian, who'd done the MPhil a year below me - was having what (despite his being Irish) was billed as a belated house-warming over on Osney Island (about the furthest west I've ever been in Oxford, despite being misnamed East Street). I was hoping to see several friends from the department that I haven't seen in a couple of weeks, but by the time I got there things were already surprisingly quite - half a dozen or so people sat around playing cards and drinking games. In the end, it was just me, Ian and Chris - another recent MPhil leaver - staying until around 2:30. What I caught probably wasn't so exciting or varied as Leo's party, but I quite like the low-key format - I'm not big on having to make lots of small talk with people I don't know. While neither were wild excesses of hedonism, both parties were interesting in different ways. And it certainly beats sitting around the flat alone!
Saturday, March 17, 2007
Home Alone
While Fiona's still in New Zealand for another three weeks or so, this weekend Ed's gone home for a pre-Easter weekend and Cat's gone on some church camp/cake-eating weekend thing, so I'm home alone in a flat that really does feel rather quiet. Hopefully I won't end up in any Macaulay Culkin-style escapades... In fact, I already have invites to two parties tonight, and might well try to make both: my friend Leo has invited me to come to his friend's St Patrick's Day party in Jericho and someone from the department is having a house-warming over in furthest west Oxford (i.e. past the train station)
Friday, March 16, 2007
Good Times in Academia?
I'm slightly surprised to hear, contrary to what I'm so often told about bureaucracy, RAE targets and under-pay/funding, that these are good days to be going into academia, according to Warwick economist Andrew Oswald in The Independent (and on his website). Too bad my job-hunting has so-far been unsuccessful, but at least if he's right I'm not heading down a dead-end in my current projected career.
For what it's worth, his advice to aspiring academics is: be different (while lottery-voting is hardly paradigm-shifting, it does seem to be somewhat off the beaten track, and strike most people as at least slightly crazy), do teacher training (again, check - I took a Learning Institute course this term), stay away from media until later in your career, and try to get stuff published (running out of time on that one - I need to get the thesis done asap, while still funded).
For what it's worth, his advice to aspiring academics is: be different (while lottery-voting is hardly paradigm-shifting, it does seem to be somewhat off the beaten track, and strike most people as at least slightly crazy), do teacher training (again, check - I took a Learning Institute course this term), stay away from media until later in your career, and try to get stuff published (running out of time on that one - I need to get the thesis done asap, while still funded).
Biblical Lotteries
I don't think Gataker would approve, but here's an example (in Lego) of lots being drawn for a new Apostle in Acts 1:15. Thanks to Chris.
EoT Dinner: A Bridge Too Far?
Last night was our regular End of Term dinner - the last of the out-going committee.
It was a really nice meal. The French theme wasn't too obtrusive, apart from grace and a few speeches (I think our Francophone VP and President may have conferred on this), though my place was set for 'Benoit'.
(For those on Facebook, some albums can be found here, here and here)
In a radical break from tradition, we went to The Bridge rather than Baby Love afterwards. It was amazingly my first time there, and for most of it I wasn't disappointed by what I'd been 'missing out' on. They were playing something loosely 'urban', r&b and/or hip-hop, and the place was swarming with (Jesus) undergrads. Things improved somewhat when I found the upstairs room - playing a mix of popular rock and dance stuff without too much cheese - but even so, I doubt I'll be returning soon.
The arrival of a new Ministry t-shirt and last week's fun at the Zodiac makes me keen to visit the Cellar or Zodiac again soon though...
It was a really nice meal. The French theme wasn't too obtrusive, apart from grace and a few speeches (I think our Francophone VP and President may have conferred on this), though my place was set for 'Benoit'.
(For those on Facebook, some albums can be found here, here and here)
In a radical break from tradition, we went to The Bridge rather than Baby Love afterwards. It was amazingly my first time there, and for most of it I wasn't disappointed by what I'd been 'missing out' on. They were playing something loosely 'urban', r&b and/or hip-hop, and the place was swarming with (Jesus) undergrads. Things improved somewhat when I found the upstairs room - playing a mix of popular rock and dance stuff without too much cheese - but even so, I doubt I'll be returning soon.
The arrival of a new Ministry t-shirt and last week's fun at the Zodiac makes me keen to visit the Cellar or Zodiac again soon though...
Another No Interview
Today I received definite confirmation that I wasn't shortlisted for the LMH post either. Given the letter was sent on the 14th, the original scheduled date for the interviews, I'd already assumed this. This job, being more senior, it wasn't so disappointing, though it would have been nice to get at least an interview (I did for the very similar Lincoln job last summer - though that was specific to my field).
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Charles Taylor wins Templeton Prize
News story here. (I've been buying The Independent this week for a free gift offer)
It's not too clear exactly what he did to earn it, but given it's worth almost one thousand times what my college graduate scholarship is worth (970, to be more exact) I guess it was important...
It's not too clear exactly what he did to earn it, but given it's worth almost one thousand times what my college graduate scholarship is worth (970, to be more exact) I guess it was important...
Beautiful Indeed
Tonight is our regular graduate End of Term dinner in college. The theme is 'la belle epoque', so I just looked that up on Wikipedia for inspiration. I was struck to read that:
In the Belle Epoque, France was one of the first countries in the world to let all men have the right to vote, in 1871. In 1905, it granted suffrage to Blacks, Asians, and Jews.
Am I to assume that between 1871 and 1905 the only blacks, Asians and Jews in France were women?
In the Belle Epoque, France was one of the first countries in the world to let all men have the right to vote, in 1871. In 1905, it granted suffrage to Blacks, Asians, and Jews.
Am I to assume that between 1871 and 1905 the only blacks, Asians and Jews in France were women?
No Draw
I see today the Football League are considering scrapping draws, in favour of extra time and/or penalties. (Comments here and here). No doubt more penalty shoot-outs will result in a lot of people saying games are decided by lottery, even though that's not true (whereas this is).
Personally, I don't want to see draws scrapped. I'm pretty happy as things are, even if you sometimes see one team park the bus and earn a frustrating 0-0 draw. (One might also think it would threaten the pools, but I guess they can work fine simply counting the score at 90 minutes, before ET/penalties).
Still, I'm happy for the League to be considering possibilities. I don't think we should blindly accept the status quo if the game could be improved - thus I'd also whole-heartedly support at least the consideration of video replays. As regards making the game a bit more interesting, at least in extra time, I've long thought it might be a good idea to take the penalties before extra time, but only apply the result if still drawn after it. That would certainly give one team plenty of incentive to attack during the added period...
This update makes clear the plan is simply to have a shootout to determine who gets an extra point. That seems less crazy, and would have the incidental benefit that there would always be three points awarded each game, which may make it slightly easier to predict or compare points totals.
Personally, I don't want to see draws scrapped. I'm pretty happy as things are, even if you sometimes see one team park the bus and earn a frustrating 0-0 draw. (One might also think it would threaten the pools, but I guess they can work fine simply counting the score at 90 minutes, before ET/penalties).
Still, I'm happy for the League to be considering possibilities. I don't think we should blindly accept the status quo if the game could be improved - thus I'd also whole-heartedly support at least the consideration of video replays. As regards making the game a bit more interesting, at least in extra time, I've long thought it might be a good idea to take the penalties before extra time, but only apply the result if still drawn after it. That would certainly give one team plenty of incentive to attack during the added period...
This update makes clear the plan is simply to have a shootout to determine who gets an extra point. That seems less crazy, and would have the incidental benefit that there would always be three points awarded each game, which may make it slightly easier to predict or compare points totals.
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Writing
You may have noticed a lot of posts lately. Yes, it's the Easter vac, and I now have some time on my hands again... However, the main project for the next few weeks is, of course, thesis writing - and I've written about 2,000 words today, radically re-writing chapter one.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Man Utd 4-3 European XI
I wouldn't normally blog about a non-Liverpool post, by my friend Rob came round to watch this special charity match. As usual with testimonial-type events (especially mid-season) the game was played in a relaxed, friendly fashion, which made it unsurprising that the attackers got plenty of time on the ball with barely a challenge. It was also unsurprising that Man Utd took an early lead, given the Europeans hadn't really had any time to gel as a team. The 4-1 half-time scoreline may have been a surprise, given the Europeans should theoretically at least have been able to boast better individuals, but the introduction of Carragher, Gerrard (booed at every touch), Zenden and later Fowler helped turn that around - the Europeans winning the second half to finish 4-3, even after having a decent goal called off-side and being denied a penalty. It was Diouf who got both goals - even taking a penalty ahead of Fowler. Never mind, maybe he'll have to wait until Athens for his send-off...
p.s. Watching with Rob resulted in a lengthy discussion as to whether or not defenders could keep clean sheets. While Rob was happy to credit them with shut outs, he argued that definitionally only agents - be they individual goalkeepers or collective teams - could keep clean sheets. Did anyone else discuss essentially contested concepts during the match? And does anyone else have an opinion on the dispute?
(Part of my case was that some fantasy football-type contests credit defenders for keeping clean sheets, e.g. here and here. Of course, some might refer to something like the team keeping a clean sheet - I concede Rob's usages are correct, the point really was whether mine is also)
p.s. Watching with Rob resulted in a lengthy discussion as to whether or not defenders could keep clean sheets. While Rob was happy to credit them with shut outs, he argued that definitionally only agents - be they individual goalkeepers or collective teams - could keep clean sheets. Did anyone else discuss essentially contested concepts during the match? And does anyone else have an opinion on the dispute?
(Part of my case was that some fantasy football-type contests credit defenders for keeping clean sheets, e.g. here and here. Of course, some might refer to something like the team keeping a clean sheet - I concede Rob's usages are correct, the point really was whether mine is also)
BT Robbery
A couple of days ago, I heard British Telecom criticized for charging customers who didn't play by direct debit. Today I'm more distressed to find that one of my favourite electronic artists, Brian Transeau, has been burgled. I have to admit that having received his latest album for Christmas, I still haven't really got into it (partly, I think, because it's entirely instrumental), but having not listened to it that much I'm sure it's just a matter of time...
Unequal Voting
One advantage, as I see it, of lottery-voting is that because it treats each vote equally it can easily accommodate weighted voting: if you want someone to count double, simply give them two chances. For this reason, I'm particularly interested in proposals that might recommend such.
One is Harry Brighouse and Marc Fleurbaey's 'On the Fair Allocation of Power', now available at the revamped Equality Exchange. I first saw this presented at the Nuffield Political Theory Workshop about two years ago, and enjoyed an interesting email exchange with the latter author.
I've just come across another, a David Heyd paper on 'Democratically Elected Aristocracies'. I haven't read it yet, but it seems maybe a similar idea - people being asked to agree on voting weights in the first tier of the process, then votign according to such weights.
One is Harry Brighouse and Marc Fleurbaey's 'On the Fair Allocation of Power', now available at the revamped Equality Exchange. I first saw this presented at the Nuffield Political Theory Workshop about two years ago, and enjoyed an interesting email exchange with the latter author.
I've just come across another, a David Heyd paper on 'Democratically Elected Aristocracies'. I haven't read it yet, but it seems maybe a similar idea - people being asked to agree on voting weights in the first tier of the process, then votign according to such weights.
Monday, March 12, 2007
e-Democracy in Action
It's good to know the internet can have a positive role to play in modern democracy. Forget about protesting road charging and petition Number 10: a knighthood for Bob Paisley. (See why here).
Sunday, March 11, 2007
Happy Birthday Sam
Last night I went to The Zodiac for the first time in ages. Actually I think it was my first gig since September, if it counts as such, because The Metros played a short set in Transformation, though I wasn't very impressed (my full review). Downstairs in Trashy though was really packed - sweaty and you couldn't move without bumping into people. They played some great tunes (and a few that were perhaps too cheesy) but it was a really fun night. Too bad we left around 2:15, as the crowd petered out (the Jesubites often with the 'long way back to college' excuses)
Friday, March 09, 2007
Jack Straw
I went to see Jack Straw tonight. Chatham House rules prevent me attributing anything said to him, but I didn't think he really said much interesting anyway (his main argument was about how the Commons is more effective now than 50 years ago - he only talked about the recent Lords reforms in questions).
What was more interesting was the fact - despite turning up 10 mins early - we were almost turned away by an over-zealous bouncer, until my friend Maria pointed out there were in fact seats left in the room. Some subsequent arrivals were turned away, on grounds of over-crowding and fire-safety regulations. Of course, when Jack himself turned up with some grey-haired men-in-suits they were allowed in (probably because they were important) - and after that (seemingly, to his credit, at Jack's instigation) other mere students were allowed in...
What was more interesting was the fact - despite turning up 10 mins early - we were almost turned away by an over-zealous bouncer, until my friend Maria pointed out there were in fact seats left in the room. Some subsequent arrivals were turned away, on grounds of over-crowding and fire-safety regulations. Of course, when Jack himself turned up with some grey-haired men-in-suits they were allowed in (probably because they were important) - and after that (seemingly, to his credit, at Jack's instigation) other mere students were allowed in...
Thursday, March 08, 2007
GCR Elections
The new GCR Committee were elected tonight - unsurprisingly, everyone beat R.O.N., and Mo beat Melissa in the only contested contest for V-P.
Well done to Rhiannon for listening to me explain about electoral systems in the bar afterwards. For those that missed it, my paper from the Theory of Voting class explains how STV differs from simple plurality election methods.
Well done to Rhiannon for listening to me explain about electoral systems in the bar afterwards. For those that missed it, my paper from the Theory of Voting class explains how STV differs from simple plurality election methods.
More Jobs Gone...
It looks like I haven't got an interview for the recent LMH job, given they haven't even bothered to contact me.
More disappointingly, I wasn't shortlisted for St Hilda's either, but at least they were good enough to respond to my request for feedback. It seems they think I lack experience - which is possible, as while I don't know about other applicants I'm behind most of my cohort on teaching. They also said they think I'm too early in the doctorate, which seems odd as I'm planning to finish within a year, and as I said many of my friends already have lectureships, at least one of which is an equivalent stipendiary one...
More disappointingly, I wasn't shortlisted for St Hilda's either, but at least they were good enough to respond to my request for feedback. It seems they think I lack experience - which is possible, as while I don't know about other applicants I'm behind most of my cohort on teaching. They also said they think I'm too early in the doctorate, which seems odd as I'm planning to finish within a year, and as I said many of my friends already have lectureships, at least one of which is an equivalent stipendiary one...
Tuesday, March 06, 2007
Liverpool 0-1 Barcelona (agg 2-2)
It's been a long while since I was so happy with a defeat! I actually said to my friend Jonas before the Man Utd match that, if someone had offered me 1-0 defeats in both with the sweetener of no injuries then I'd probably have accepted it (losing to the Mancs hurts, but there’s not much left to fight for in the Premiership whereas this puts us through on away goals).
What does disappoint me is losing consecutive games at Anfield, for the second time this year – when really, we should have been about three-nil up at half-time. Riise alone could easily have had a hat-trick, and Momo Sissoko also hit the crossbar with a great 35-yard first-time shot.
As it was, Gudjohnsen’s goal in 76 minutes made for some nervy moments towards the end – when I was worried the commentator’s curse would doom us, but we held on, with Carragher again magnificent at the back. If Terry’s still out, then JC has to start the up-coming England games.
What does disappoint me is losing consecutive games at Anfield, for the second time this year – when really, we should have been about three-nil up at half-time. Riise alone could easily have had a hat-trick, and Momo Sissoko also hit the crossbar with a great 35-yard first-time shot.
As it was, Gudjohnsen’s goal in 76 minutes made for some nervy moments towards the end – when I was worried the commentator’s curse would doom us, but we held on, with Carragher again magnificent at the back. If Terry’s still out, then JC has to start the up-coming England games.
Saturday, March 03, 2007
Liverpool 0-1 Man Utd
Grrr, how cruel, and not for the first time. At least we dominated the game against the champions-elect, which gives me some consolation. Better yet, there's still Tuesday to look forward to, and the chance of revenge in Europe...
Happy Dan?
Happy Dan?
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
At Last
Schools to allocate places by lottery.
See also this previous BBC story, and Harry Brighouse's proposal.
See also this previous BBC story, and Harry Brighouse's proposal.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Dworkin
I just came from a public lecture given by Ronald Dworkin, based on his new book. I thought it was an interesting argument that we need to engage in argument with each other, seeing those with different opinions as people to defeat rather than rivals to be overcome. I'm not sure how new what he was saying differs from deliberative democrats or political liberals (though he claimed to differ from Rawls' public reason because he thinks people can argue from within comprehensive conceptions, this was limited by a belief we share underlying principles that each person is of equal intrinsic worth and has their own life to lead)
UPDATE: A longer account is given by Colin Farrelly.
UPDATE: A longer account is given by Colin Farrelly.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Liverpool 4-0 Sheffield Utd
I think it's a mark of progress under Rafa that we can make seven changes and still win 4-0, even if it is 'only' Sheffield Utd. Granted two penalties helped - but while Gerrard was certainly looking for the first I think he deserved it, and if he didn't then the subsequent kick to Peter Crouch's face must have involved a dangerously high foot, and the second can hardly be disputed. Robbie is still, for me, our best finisher and penalty-taker, so it was no surprise to see him put them away. That's three Fowler penalties after Gerrard fouls against Sheffield Utd this season (after this) - no doubt Neil Warnock told them to stop doing that in the second half. Nonetheless, things were fairly comfortable as Hyypia and Gerrard wrapped up the points, and Jerzy helped break a record run of home clean sheets in the Premiership I believe.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Barcelona 1-2 Liverpool
Having seen my friend Sarah give a very professional paper (with surely a record attendance for a non-Jerry seminar) I had to skip the usual Political Theory KA visit to watch the game in the University Club - which turned out to be far from ideal, as they were also showing Chelsea. It was certainly a night to remember though! For a minute, well about 30 to be honest, it looked like the reigning European champions might over-run us, but intelligent counter-attacking and some great defending by Carragher saw us come away with a remarkable victory in Camp Nou, that's probably earned us favourites tag for the second leg.
Sunday, February 18, 2007
Warwick Conference
The Warwick conference was a pretty nice day out - ten of us shared the train ride together - but as usual pretty Oxford-dominated (us being about half the paper givers).
There wasn't a very big audience for my paper, which may have been partly because both Julia and I had given our papers in Oxford this term anyway. Also whereas last year I got most of the faculty, this year it was only Andrew Reeve who was chairing us (though he did end up asking almost half the questions, which was nice). People obviously did remember me from last year, and I had a good chat with Fabienne Peter over lunch about my ideas.
Most of the questions I got were pretty much ones I'd already heard, but it was nice to meet a few new people, in particular Nat Coleman, who's working on lotteries in some capacity, see some old ones and have a day out together. The big regret is I didn't get chance to talk to Peter Jones in the end, though I see he's also doing BNW this year...
In the evening, Rob, Gabriel and I went to Milan's house party, which was fun - though owing perhaps in part to tiredness I have to admit to not mixing with any of his various friends that I didn't know.
There wasn't a very big audience for my paper, which may have been partly because both Julia and I had given our papers in Oxford this term anyway. Also whereas last year I got most of the faculty, this year it was only Andrew Reeve who was chairing us (though he did end up asking almost half the questions, which was nice). People obviously did remember me from last year, and I had a good chat with Fabienne Peter over lunch about my ideas.
Most of the questions I got were pretty much ones I'd already heard, but it was nice to meet a few new people, in particular Nat Coleman, who's working on lotteries in some capacity, see some old ones and have a day out together. The big regret is I didn't get chance to talk to Peter Jones in the end, though I see he's also doing BNW this year...
In the evening, Rob, Gabriel and I went to Milan's house party, which was fun - though owing perhaps in part to tiredness I have to admit to not mixing with any of his various friends that I didn't know.
Friday, February 16, 2007
Warwick Paper (Handout)
Tomorrow I'm going to the Warwick graduate conference (which I also attended last year). Here's the handout, which (I hope) gives a good overview of my paper:
3 Using Lotteries to Adjudicate between Groups
(3.4) Starting with Lotteries
Premise: where we must adjudicate between two competing claims to an indivisible good, it is fair to toss a coin. The good is attached to some arbitrary criterion that each party has an equal opportunity of satisfying. Note actual agreement on this procedure is not necessary – what matters is that reasonable people would accept it as fair. I want to ask what to do when there are unequal numbers on either side.
(3.5) Taurek’s Argument for Equal Chances
John Taurek says if we face a choice between one and five people dying, and look at it only from individual points of view, then all we can say is that one outcome is worse for the one and the other worse for the five. Since the one is not required to give up his own life to save the five, Taurek assumes a third party is justified in identifying with this one person, and choosing to save him rather than the five. Further, he claims that if the rescuer wants to be fair, he should toss a coin. The situation in the five-against-one conflict is in no important way different from the one-against-one conflict: tossing a coin gives each a 50% chance of survival.
(3.6) Scanlon’s Objection to Equal Chances
Scanlon accepts the individualist restriction and ban on aggregation, but wants to argue one can justify saving the greater number not on the utilitarian grounds that it is better but on the basis of being fair to each individual. Where there is an extra person on one side he argues she can complain her claim is not duly considered because it has made no difference to how the matter is decided – to still toss a coin is effectively to ignore her presence. Otsuka has criticised this argument as implicitly aggregative, so we need to know in more detail what difference the extra person should make.
(3.7) Scanlon’s Argument for Saving the Greater Number
A vs. B & C
A vs. B, C & D
A & E vs. B, C & D
It seems the only way Scanlon can say that D and E count is hypothetically; for instance, had C not been with B, then D’s presence would have been enough to break the tie with A. So it is not that each person must actually make a difference, because they might already be out-weighed by others, but that had the numbers been otherwise they could have made or broken a tie. Yet if this is all he means, it is not obvious he can reject equal chances. Scanlon cannot find a sense of ‘making a difference’ on which saving the greater number does allow each to make a difference but equal chances do not.
(3.8) The Weighted Lottery: Pooling Chances
A weighted lottery, that proportions chances to each group in accordance with numbers, obviously counts each person equally. As we move through the earlier cases the chances alter from 50/50, to 33/67, to 25/75, to 40/60. The basic idea is that each person has some individual baseline chance (1/n), coupled with the intuition that it is permissible for them to pool these chances. While each officially gets an equal chance on the wheel, the de facto chances of rescue will differ – one in a larger group has more chance of benefiting from others’ good fortune. But if those whose claims don’t conflict share the same slice of the wheel, then we can end up back at tossing a coin.
(3.10) Counting Individuals, Again
When it comes to resolving conflicts of interest democratically we may assume that there are two things people have interests in – one is that their view prevails, but they also have an interest in its prevailing because it is their view, i.e. in their interest being counted and effective. Equal chances may give people fair chances at getting what they want, but it does not respect each person’s preferences because the numbers make no difference.
(3.11) Scanlon’s Argument Against Weighted Lotteries
Scanlon rejects weighted lotteries as: “There is no reason, at this point, to reshuffle the moral deck, by holding a weighted lottery, or an unweighted one” (p.234). But a lottery is only re-shuffling if the deck has already been shuffled to begin with.
(3.12) Prior Randomisation versus Fixed Majorities
Five people are on a ship when it breaks up in a storm. Four manage to get to a lifeboat, while the remaining one is left floating on a piece of wreckage. It is a matter of chance who ends up in each position, so ‘the greater number’ is not a rigid designator. Now a weighted lottery would not only be to “reshuffle the moral deck”, but would diminish everyone’s chances.
Now suppose A goes out to sea alone in a small fishing boat, while B, C, D and E are in the same waters in their larger ship. A knows, when he goes to sea, that he would be the one not saved; would it be unreasonable of him to object to the policy of saving the greater number?
This difference mirrors that between a permanent, fixed majority and a fluid society in which each individual has an equal chance of being in the eventual majority. In the former case, majority rule is fair and optimal. But where groups seem to be defined in advance, the only way to give everyone a chance is to hold a lottery.
(3.13) Proportional Chances versus Proportional Outcomes
Another possibility is compromise on specific policies (results proportional to numbers). We may be able to divide a budget between two projects, but not all decisions are susceptible to compromise or it cannot be arrived at by procedural institutions.
(3.14) Conclusion: Towards Political ApplicationKamm identifies ‘saving the greater number’ with ‘majority-rule’ and speaks not only of saving people but also of satisfaction and preferences. I have argued numbers should make some difference, but need not determine the outcome. The attraction of saving the greater number or majority rule is less obvious when we are dealing with larger numbers with little difference between them, such as 1,001-against-1,000. Weighted lotteries, by proportioning chances, respect numbers: 60% of the people have a 60% chance of victory. As Timmermann says, speaking of the rescue cases, “It is rational for the members of a society not to choose to maximize the probability of being saved. A somewhat lower overall probability is the price they would be willing to pay for their claim’s never being discounted right at the beginning” (p.112).
3 Using Lotteries to Adjudicate between Groups
(3.4) Starting with Lotteries
Premise: where we must adjudicate between two competing claims to an indivisible good, it is fair to toss a coin. The good is attached to some arbitrary criterion that each party has an equal opportunity of satisfying. Note actual agreement on this procedure is not necessary – what matters is that reasonable people would accept it as fair. I want to ask what to do when there are unequal numbers on either side.
(3.5) Taurek’s Argument for Equal Chances
John Taurek says if we face a choice between one and five people dying, and look at it only from individual points of view, then all we can say is that one outcome is worse for the one and the other worse for the five. Since the one is not required to give up his own life to save the five, Taurek assumes a third party is justified in identifying with this one person, and choosing to save him rather than the five. Further, he claims that if the rescuer wants to be fair, he should toss a coin. The situation in the five-against-one conflict is in no important way different from the one-against-one conflict: tossing a coin gives each a 50% chance of survival.
(3.6) Scanlon’s Objection to Equal Chances
Scanlon accepts the individualist restriction and ban on aggregation, but wants to argue one can justify saving the greater number not on the utilitarian grounds that it is better but on the basis of being fair to each individual. Where there is an extra person on one side he argues she can complain her claim is not duly considered because it has made no difference to how the matter is decided – to still toss a coin is effectively to ignore her presence. Otsuka has criticised this argument as implicitly aggregative, so we need to know in more detail what difference the extra person should make.
(3.7) Scanlon’s Argument for Saving the Greater Number
A vs. B & C
A vs. B, C & D
A & E vs. B, C & D
It seems the only way Scanlon can say that D and E count is hypothetically; for instance, had C not been with B, then D’s presence would have been enough to break the tie with A. So it is not that each person must actually make a difference, because they might already be out-weighed by others, but that had the numbers been otherwise they could have made or broken a tie. Yet if this is all he means, it is not obvious he can reject equal chances. Scanlon cannot find a sense of ‘making a difference’ on which saving the greater number does allow each to make a difference but equal chances do not.
(3.8) The Weighted Lottery: Pooling Chances
A weighted lottery, that proportions chances to each group in accordance with numbers, obviously counts each person equally. As we move through the earlier cases the chances alter from 50/50, to 33/67, to 25/75, to 40/60. The basic idea is that each person has some individual baseline chance (1/n), coupled with the intuition that it is permissible for them to pool these chances. While each officially gets an equal chance on the wheel, the de facto chances of rescue will differ – one in a larger group has more chance of benefiting from others’ good fortune. But if those whose claims don’t conflict share the same slice of the wheel, then we can end up back at tossing a coin.
(3.10) Counting Individuals, Again
When it comes to resolving conflicts of interest democratically we may assume that there are two things people have interests in – one is that their view prevails, but they also have an interest in its prevailing because it is their view, i.e. in their interest being counted and effective. Equal chances may give people fair chances at getting what they want, but it does not respect each person’s preferences because the numbers make no difference.
(3.11) Scanlon’s Argument Against Weighted Lotteries
Scanlon rejects weighted lotteries as: “There is no reason, at this point, to reshuffle the moral deck, by holding a weighted lottery, or an unweighted one” (p.234). But a lottery is only re-shuffling if the deck has already been shuffled to begin with.
(3.12) Prior Randomisation versus Fixed Majorities
Five people are on a ship when it breaks up in a storm. Four manage to get to a lifeboat, while the remaining one is left floating on a piece of wreckage. It is a matter of chance who ends up in each position, so ‘the greater number’ is not a rigid designator. Now a weighted lottery would not only be to “reshuffle the moral deck”, but would diminish everyone’s chances.
Now suppose A goes out to sea alone in a small fishing boat, while B, C, D and E are in the same waters in their larger ship. A knows, when he goes to sea, that he would be the one not saved; would it be unreasonable of him to object to the policy of saving the greater number?
This difference mirrors that between a permanent, fixed majority and a fluid society in which each individual has an equal chance of being in the eventual majority. In the former case, majority rule is fair and optimal. But where groups seem to be defined in advance, the only way to give everyone a chance is to hold a lottery.
(3.13) Proportional Chances versus Proportional Outcomes
Another possibility is compromise on specific policies (results proportional to numbers). We may be able to divide a budget between two projects, but not all decisions are susceptible to compromise or it cannot be arrived at by procedural institutions.
(3.14) Conclusion: Towards Political ApplicationKamm identifies ‘saving the greater number’ with ‘majority-rule’ and speaks not only of saving people but also of satisfaction and preferences. I have argued numbers should make some difference, but need not determine the outcome. The attraction of saving the greater number or majority rule is less obvious when we are dealing with larger numbers with little difference between them, such as 1,001-against-1,000. Weighted lotteries, by proportioning chances, respect numbers: 60% of the people have a 60% chance of victory. As Timmermann says, speaking of the rescue cases, “It is rational for the members of a society not to choose to maximize the probability of being saved. A somewhat lower overall probability is the price they would be willing to pay for their claim’s never being discounted right at the beginning” (p.112).
Monday, February 12, 2007
Two Democracy Lectures tomorrow
Firstly, for the rest of this term my supervisor David Miller is giving the undergraduate Theory of Politics lectures. I'm fairly confident he hasn't given any undergrad lectures in the time I've been here, and I don't foresee it being a regular event. Between this and the fact he's planning on talking about demcoracy (he mentioned Riker and Gerry Mackie to me) I'm definitely planning on going. Exam Schools at 12.
Secondly, a one off special lecture on the Medieval Origins of Democracy, advertised here and listed about half way down the first page here, also sounds quite interesting, and ties in to something I was reading the other day about Vikings, popular sovereignty and feudalism.
Secondly, a one off special lecture on the Medieval Origins of Democracy, advertised here and listed about half way down the first page here, also sounds quite interesting, and ties in to something I was reading the other day about Vikings, popular sovereignty and feudalism.
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Newcastle 2-1 Liverpool
The manager of the month curse strikes again! Somehow, we were all over Newcastle for most of the first half - with Bellamy in particular getting a lot of joy out of his ex-team mates. Than, a Reina clearance that richocheted off Agger and a debateable penalty allowed Newcastle to escape with all three points.
It's disappointing - and shouldn't have happened if we were capable of finishing more of the many chances we created - but I think the BBC were unjustly harsh on Reina. After an admittedly shaky start to the season, he'd formed the basis of a very solid defence over the last few months (just look what happened when Dudek stood in) and his 'sweeper keeper' role, while occasionally conceding needless goals, does on balance work well.
If these Americans want to spend big, then I suggest we need a real goal-poaching predator, some quality wide men (front and back), a centre-half capable of at least pushing Carra and Agger for a place and possibly a creative 'hole' type player, since without Kewell or Garcia we often seem a bit short of ideas in the final third. So, only half a team from glory...
It's disappointing - and shouldn't have happened if we were capable of finishing more of the many chances we created - but I think the BBC were unjustly harsh on Reina. After an admittedly shaky start to the season, he'd formed the basis of a very solid defence over the last few months (just look what happened when Dudek stood in) and his 'sweeper keeper' role, while occasionally conceding needless goals, does on balance work well.
If these Americans want to spend big, then I suggest we need a real goal-poaching predator, some quality wide men (front and back), a centre-half capable of at least pushing Carra and Agger for a place and possibly a creative 'hole' type player, since without Kewell or Garcia we often seem a bit short of ideas in the final third. So, only half a team from glory...
Thursday, February 08, 2007
Snow Business
Today's snowfall made the cycle into town - and getting about generally - slightly hazardous. Still, it was nice to walk into college and be confronted by snowmen in both first and second quad. And a few have been built in the field outside our flat.
Sadly I don't have a digital camera, but Milan captures pristene snow here and the BBC also have a picture of snowmen on the Martyrs' Memorial. Those with Facebook can also see these albums: one, two.
Sadly I don't have a digital camera, but Milan captures pristene snow here and the BBC also have a picture of snowmen on the Martyrs' Memorial. Those with Facebook can also see these albums: one, two.
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Lincoln
Tonight I went on the Lincoln leg of our latest exchange dinner. I'd always heard very good things about their food and, based on tonight, they were thoroughly justified. Unfortunately since it was their half-way hall, we didn't get to eat in the hall, and the bar was packed, but nonetheless it was a truly splendid meal. I already feel embarrassed at the thought of bringing them to Jesus in a fortnight's time...
Monday, February 05, 2007
Skorupski
Today I saw John Skorupski (photo) at the Moral Philosophy Seminar. He's not only a prominent philosopher - who I saw at the same series four years ago (while still an undergraduate) and who's book on Mill I heartily recommend (albeit only on the basis of ch.9) - but also the father of one of my friends.
I went out to dinner with him, and four others from the seminar, at Al Shami's - a Lebanese restaurant in the Jericho area. It was a very interesting and stimulating discussion, that took in his opinions on everything from the Leiter report, to Michael Rosen, saving the greater number and buck-passing. Apparently, for the record, he thinks one of the major motivations behind my thesis is a load of nonsense, because he thinks it's frankly absurd to suppose that fairness might require tossing a coin. I suppose I should beware the possibility that, say, job panels may find some of my ideas strange too...
I went out to dinner with him, and four others from the seminar, at Al Shami's - a Lebanese restaurant in the Jericho area. It was a very interesting and stimulating discussion, that took in his opinions on everything from the Leiter report, to Michael Rosen, saving the greater number and buck-passing. Apparently, for the record, he thinks one of the major motivations behind my thesis is a load of nonsense, because he thinks it's frankly absurd to suppose that fairness might require tossing a coin. I suppose I should beware the possibility that, say, job panels may find some of my ideas strange too...
Saturday, February 03, 2007
Liverpool 0-0 Everton
Disappointingly, we couldn't avenge our defeat at Goodison. Despite playing three strikers - with Kuyt rather wasted on the left wing (I'd have swapped him and Bellamy most likely) - we couldn't break down their massed defence. Everton came for the draw and fair play to them, they were able to shut us out. Pennant and Riise's crosses were poor and we seemed devoid of ideas. It was the type of match where we needed someone who could provide a spark of creativity - Kewell or Garcia, both injured, being our best hopes of such - and sadly on the day we couldn't deliver. Still, we kept another clean sheet and managed to avoid losing ground to Arsenal (who also drew), so not the worst result.
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Excellence
It seems Gordon's Brown's new target is not only education but 'excellence, excellence, excellence' (BBC report). Of further related interest is the idea he may make benefits such as EMA conditional on continuing education, tying in with the government's recent proposals to raise the school leaving age.
Tuesday, January 30, 2007
West Ham 1-2 Liverpool
Again playing three strikers worked quite well. I'm not sure it's a settled system, or would work against other big teams, but nice to know we're willing to attack when we go up against struggling teams, even away from home. As it was, 2-1 doesn't look too comfortable, but from the moment Kuyt opened the scoring ten seconds after half-time this one looked fairly safe.
Monday, January 29, 2007
American English
The review of Cecile Fabre's Whose Body is it Anyway? is a step nearer print - today I received corrected proofs. There were rather a lot of corrections, some of which were standard (one split infinitive), others Americanisms (do they really say 'florishing'?) and others I consider somewhat fussy. Nonetheless, some were rather more frustrating:
A sentence along the lines 'we accept a transfer from a dead person's estate to the needy, so we need some reason to deny them rights to the dead person's organs' was changed to 'we accept a transfer from a dead person's estate to needy people, so we need some reason to deny the needy rights to the dead person's organs'. Maybe my knowledge of English grammar is deficient - like many native speakers, it's more something I 'picked up' than was taught formally - but I fail to see why I couldn't say 'the needy' in the former case and yet the construction was inserted in the latter.
Moreover, even if it isn't ultra-correct standard English, talk of 'the talented', 'the needy', etc is common in the discourse. Several corrections seem to stem from unawareness of such: for instance, Rawls' now standard term 'conceptions of the good' was changed to 'conceptions of goodness'.
Even worse, however, were a few examples where I think philosophical points were missed or twisted:
An extensively re-worked sentence about the threshold of distributive justice had an insertion that stated - needlessly and incorrectly - threshold of well being, though Fabre - like many others - is a resourcist.
Secondly, the phrase 'body-rich' got changed to'people who have an excess [of organs]' - but I don't think it's claimed anyone has excess kidneys, only that those with more than needed (i.e. two) might donate them to those with none.
A sentence along the lines 'we accept a transfer from a dead person's estate to the needy, so we need some reason to deny them rights to the dead person's organs' was changed to 'we accept a transfer from a dead person's estate to needy people, so we need some reason to deny the needy rights to the dead person's organs'. Maybe my knowledge of English grammar is deficient - like many native speakers, it's more something I 'picked up' than was taught formally - but I fail to see why I couldn't say 'the needy' in the former case and yet the construction was inserted in the latter.
Moreover, even if it isn't ultra-correct standard English, talk of 'the talented', 'the needy', etc is common in the discourse. Several corrections seem to stem from unawareness of such: for instance, Rawls' now standard term 'conceptions of the good' was changed to 'conceptions of goodness'.
Even worse, however, were a few examples where I think philosophical points were missed or twisted:
An extensively re-worked sentence about the threshold of distributive justice had an insertion that stated - needlessly and incorrectly - threshold of well being, though Fabre - like many others - is a resourcist.
Secondly, the phrase 'body-rich' got changed to'people who have an excess [of organs]' - but I don't think it's claimed anyone has excess kidneys, only that those with more than needed (i.e. two) might donate them to those with none.
Wednesday, January 24, 2007
Bargain Books
Blackwells has a pretty good sale on at the moment. I just bought five or six books, most of which were reduced to £2-3. The pick, however, was £5 for Duncan Black's Theory of Committees and Elections (Amazon), which had been reduced from a massive £119 (compred to Amazon's £104). Too bad it wasn't this newer edition, but still a bargain. Altogether I spent £21 on books originally priced around £150 - which I consider a pretty good day's work...
Monday, January 22, 2007
Interesting Scientific Research
Two stories in the BBC health section caught my eye:
Couples feel each other's pain - This sounds very much like Hume's account of sympathy to me. Further, although the study was based on couples, I see no evidence the findings are necessarily confined to such - it could be, from what's reported, a natural reaction to witnessing any other suffering.
Pain from a woman hurts less - This backs up the claim made by Wayne Sumner (citing some psychological evidence) that pleasure and pain consists of a sensation and an affective element - how much we care. He argues pleasure and pain themselves are not always good or bad - we may shun the former or welcome the latter, in certain contexts. Rather what matters to the quality of someone's life is enjoyment or suffering.
Couples feel each other's pain - This sounds very much like Hume's account of sympathy to me. Further, although the study was based on couples, I see no evidence the findings are necessarily confined to such - it could be, from what's reported, a natural reaction to witnessing any other suffering.
Pain from a woman hurts less - This backs up the claim made by Wayne Sumner (citing some psychological evidence) that pleasure and pain consists of a sensation and an affective element - how much we care. He argues pleasure and pain themselves are not always good or bad - we may shun the former or welcome the latter, in certain contexts. Rather what matters to the quality of someone's life is enjoyment or suffering.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
Liverpool 2-0 Chelsea
Finally league victory over Mourinho's men. Granted we may be considered lucky that, for various reasons, they had lost Makalale, Terry and Carvalho, but for a team with such resources - and who felt they could dispense with Huth and Gallas in the summer - I find it hard to feel much sympathy. Let it not be forgotten we were missing Kewell, Garcia and Sissoko, among others.
Kuyt took early advantage of Chelsea's defensive frailty, and Pennant followed it up with a superb strike from distance - what a way to break his duck. Too bad we couldn't add to it - Riise was close, and I think Crouch may have had a penalty claim when going to the rebound after Riise had hit the bar. Still, 2-0 was a satisfactory lead, and one that didn't look in much danger of being dented.
Kuyt took early advantage of Chelsea's defensive frailty, and Pennant followed it up with a superb strike from distance - what a way to break his duck. Too bad we couldn't add to it - Riise was close, and I think Crouch may have had a penalty claim when going to the rebound after Riise had hit the bar. Still, 2-0 was a satisfactory lead, and one that didn't look in much danger of being dented.
Saturday, January 13, 2007
Watford 0-3 Liverpool
With Watford bottom of the Premiership, this should have been an easy game, but after the two Cup defeats I was worried it could prove a potential banana skin if the Hornets were to score first. Thankfully we made fairly easy work of a 3-0 win.
Interestingly, Benitez not only reverted to wingbacks, which I always say works well, but for the first time deployed three strikers to good effect, with Bellamy and Crouch involved in all three goals. I can't wait to see the team he picks to face Chelsea (who, from the sound of it, could have Cech back, but probably not Terry, if reports are to be beleived).
Interestingly, Benitez not only reverted to wingbacks, which I always say works well, but for the first time deployed three strikers to good effect, with Bellamy and Crouch involved in all three goals. I can't wait to see the team he picks to face Chelsea (who, from the sound of it, could have Cech back, but probably not Terry, if reports are to be beleived).
Friday, January 12, 2007
Careers Day
Today I attended a careers event called Future Focus for final year DPhil students. I'm not sure how helpful it was, to be honest. At the time, I thought it was telling me useful things about job applications, though in hingsight I'm not sure what I'd do differently. The practice interviews we had with each other were all very well, but answering pre-prepared questions asked by another student is no where near as daunting as proper interviews even I've had, much less ones in front of a full panel and even real students... Nonetheless, it was quite an enjoyable day in a way. I got to meet several other students from other subjects, which put us all in the spirit of net-working.
Thursday, January 11, 2007
Domus Dinner
Last night we had one of our graduate and supervisor dinners in college. As ever, it was a very nice occasion, with wine flowing. Since my old friend Nick - who I hadn't seen since June - was finally back in town after a term in the States, it was good to see him, in the Lamb & Flag and KA. After that, I went on to the Philosophy (post-BPhil) party in Holywell Manor. I still haven't seen how that place merits its party reputation, though the fact the bar was shut by the time I got there (and only re-opened once...) may have lowered my opinion.
School League
New school league tables are out, and if you scroll to the bottom of this BBC story (or look at the table) you'll find my old school Colchester Royal Grammar was top for A levels.
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
Liverpool 3-6 Arsenal (Carling)
Ouch! Well, I don't think I've ever seen us concede 6 goals before. Somehow, it all seemed to go to pieces at the end of the first half. At 1-1 we were in the game and then they suddenly score three goals - from, I'd like to point out, a dodgy free kick, a handball and an offside. If you look at it that way, and remember Hyypia had a goal (rightly) disallowed to offside, it could have been 4-3 to us if all those decisions had gone our way. Obviously, I wouldn't expect them all to go our way, but the fact is they did all go Arsenal's (at least one rightly, but probably two wrongly)
More concerning than this result - where both teams were largely reserves anyway - is the loss of two further players, Gonzalez and Garcia, to long term injury. Aside from the fact that with Kewell and Zenden also long term injuries this leaves our left side very short, Garcia is spectacularly important for us, especially in Europe, and now misses the chance to face his former club (Barca).
The Carling Cup has not been kind to us this year, also dealing Sissoko a long term injury, in light of which I can not only approve of Benitez's resting most of his key players but also be glad we're out. A likely final run of Spurs and Chelsea, even if we had got past Arsenal, meant we weren't so close to silverware anyway. Instead, we can now concentrate on league form (if Arsenal are so much better than us, as some have suggested after these two results, how come we're above them in the Premiership?)
More concerning than this result - where both teams were largely reserves anyway - is the loss of two further players, Gonzalez and Garcia, to long term injury. Aside from the fact that with Kewell and Zenden also long term injuries this leaves our left side very short, Garcia is spectacularly important for us, especially in Europe, and now misses the chance to face his former club (Barca).
The Carling Cup has not been kind to us this year, also dealing Sissoko a long term injury, in light of which I can not only approve of Benitez's resting most of his key players but also be glad we're out. A likely final run of Spurs and Chelsea, even if we had got past Arsenal, meant we weren't so close to silverware anyway. Instead, we can now concentrate on league form (if Arsenal are so much better than us, as some have suggested after these two results, how come we're above them in the Premiership?)
Quote Me on That
As usual, the BBC list their favourite amusing sports quotes of the week - mostly football and cricket. What's unusual is I have a contribution (i.e. something a sportsperson said I found and submitted, not me being quoted). Currently it's at the bottom of the list.
Monday, January 08, 2007
Universum Survey
I just completed a survey on students' career choices and expectations. In return, I got these results for Oxford.
It amazes me that 32% of Oxford graduates expect their first job to pay upwards of £40,000 per year - indeed for 5% over £60k (page 9). At those wages, the real world doesn't look so scary. And (according to page 7) 14% expect to be working 60 hours+ a week, so they probably deserve it.
It amazes me that 32% of Oxford graduates expect their first job to pay upwards of £40,000 per year - indeed for 5% over £60k (page 9). At those wages, the real world doesn't look so scary. And (according to page 7) 14% expect to be working 60 hours+ a week, so they probably deserve it.
Obituary
Magnus Magnusson, former author, journalist, host of Mastermind and Jesus College alumnus, died on Sunday evening. (BBC news, obituary)
Saturday, January 06, 2007
Liverpool 1-3 Arsenal (FA Cup)
Last season, all bar one of our FA Cup games were on the BBC as we went on a great run past Luton, Portsmouth, Man Utd, Birmingham, Chelsea and West Ham to win the cup in the infamous Gerrard Final. This season, all our games were on the BBC as we're out at the first hurdle!
The line up was pretty much our strongest. No surprise to see Agger replace Hyypia at the back, or Crouch preferred given Bellamy's hamstring trouble. Perhaps one unexpected mvoe was recalling Dudek in goal - but Arsenal also rotated there (UPDATE: As did Man Utd, and if it hadn't been for their injury crisis in goal I suspect Chelsea may have done so too)
I can't say I was too disappointed with the performance. We bossed most of the first half hour, only for Rosicky to score a very good goal against the run of play. Chasing the game made it harder, particularly when our defence conceded two quite sloppy goals. Some fans have blamed Dudek but I wouldn't - Reina might have saved them, but so might Dudek, I don't think we lost out there.
It was disappointing mainly because we'd dominated most of the match, albeit without creating many clear chances. Things may have been different had Alonso been given a penalty - granted he was waiting for the challenge, but that's using intelligence to try to win one, not falling over for no reason. Maybe it wasn't a penalty, on grounds he didn't have control of the ball, but given that Gilberto missed the ball by a mile and did catch Alonso's trailing leg I don't see how he could be booked.
After Kuyt's second half goal, at 2-1, we had Arsenal on the rack for the best part of 20 minutes and it really looked like if there was another goal it was to be us (not that either manager wanted a replay). Unfortunately all that changed with Henry's break away, wrapping up the victory. In cup matches, you have to press forward when you're losing, and to go out 3-1 rather than 2-1 makes no difference so that wasn't too upsetting.
What I did find strange was the fact we didn't make any attacking substitutions. Bellamy spent most of the second half warming up, but I can only conclude he wasn't fit if he wasn't used - which leaves me asking why Fowler wasn't available. And when we needed a bit of pace to stretch Arsenal, if it couldn't come from Bellamy then I'd at least have given Gonzalez a try.
Still, if we're going to go out it might as well be a) early on and b) against a big team. Anything else just adds to fixture congestion and/or embarrassment. At least we have chance for revenge on Tuesday.
The line up was pretty much our strongest. No surprise to see Agger replace Hyypia at the back, or Crouch preferred given Bellamy's hamstring trouble. Perhaps one unexpected mvoe was recalling Dudek in goal - but Arsenal also rotated there (UPDATE: As did Man Utd, and if it hadn't been for their injury crisis in goal I suspect Chelsea may have done so too)
I can't say I was too disappointed with the performance. We bossed most of the first half hour, only for Rosicky to score a very good goal against the run of play. Chasing the game made it harder, particularly when our defence conceded two quite sloppy goals. Some fans have blamed Dudek but I wouldn't - Reina might have saved them, but so might Dudek, I don't think we lost out there.
It was disappointing mainly because we'd dominated most of the match, albeit without creating many clear chances. Things may have been different had Alonso been given a penalty - granted he was waiting for the challenge, but that's using intelligence to try to win one, not falling over for no reason. Maybe it wasn't a penalty, on grounds he didn't have control of the ball, but given that Gilberto missed the ball by a mile and did catch Alonso's trailing leg I don't see how he could be booked.
After Kuyt's second half goal, at 2-1, we had Arsenal on the rack for the best part of 20 minutes and it really looked like if there was another goal it was to be us (not that either manager wanted a replay). Unfortunately all that changed with Henry's break away, wrapping up the victory. In cup matches, you have to press forward when you're losing, and to go out 3-1 rather than 2-1 makes no difference so that wasn't too upsetting.
What I did find strange was the fact we didn't make any attacking substitutions. Bellamy spent most of the second half warming up, but I can only conclude he wasn't fit if he wasn't used - which leaves me asking why Fowler wasn't available. And when we needed a bit of pace to stretch Arsenal, if it couldn't come from Bellamy then I'd at least have given Gonzalez a try.
Still, if we're going to go out it might as well be a) early on and b) against a big team. Anything else just adds to fixture congestion and/or embarrassment. At least we have chance for revenge on Tuesday.
Bikes
After some drama on the way to the conference yesterday, when my front wheel seemed flat and I needed to go through three pumps* to fix it, today I decided since it was the front I'd fix it myself.
*(it transpired my pump valve had a leak, so attaching it to a soft tyre merely deflated it - then I tried the mini folding pump device my mum had once bought me, but was only able to take it apart and still couldn't find how it was supposed to attach to the tyre or work, so in the end I had to borrow a pump from Pavel)
Frustratingly, after some effort to remove the wheel (the bolts were pretty much rusted on), I've been unable to find any leak in the tyre. I did, however, get round to fixing my spare punctured tube, which I can keep as a replacement should I need one. I've now got to go and put the wheel back...
*(it transpired my pump valve had a leak, so attaching it to a soft tyre merely deflated it - then I tried the mini folding pump device my mum had once bought me, but was only able to take it apart and still couldn't find how it was supposed to attach to the tyre or work, so in the end I had to borrow a pump from Pavel)
Frustratingly, after some effort to remove the wheel (the bolts were pretty much rusted on), I've been unable to find any leak in the tyre. I did, however, get round to fixing my spare punctured tube, which I can keep as a replacement should I need one. I've now got to go and put the wheel back...
Conference
The Political Thought Conference, held in St Catz, is a somewhat strange affair. It isn't widely advertised, and seems to run on similar secretive semi-formal lines to David's Nuffield seminar. Despite having an AGM, there's no organisation as far as I'm aware, simply the group of people who have no structure or organisation beyond this conference.
The papers I've seen have mostly been pretty good, and the conference also gives plenty of chance to meet people. Since there are few graduates, we've mostly been banded together, so as not to distract more important people from meeting other more important people. Nonetheless, I have had chance to speak to several people I knew, extract some useful leads from Alan Hamlin and Adrian Blau, and be part of a lengthy chat around Quentin Skinner in the bar last night.
Top lines of the conference (that I recall):
"I will not explain what I mean by 'explain'" - Alan Hamlin
"This is a controversial claim, so all I will say in support of it is that it is true" - Quentin Skinner
"Maybe the [bar] prices will be lowered for the conference" - Sarah
The papers I've seen have mostly been pretty good, and the conference also gives plenty of chance to meet people. Since there are few graduates, we've mostly been banded together, so as not to distract more important people from meeting other more important people. Nonetheless, I have had chance to speak to several people I knew, extract some useful leads from Alan Hamlin and Adrian Blau, and be part of a lengthy chat around Quentin Skinner in the bar last night.
Top lines of the conference (that I recall):
"I will not explain what I mean by 'explain'" - Alan Hamlin
"This is a controversial claim, so all I will say in support of it is that it is true" - Quentin Skinner
"Maybe the [bar] prices will be lowered for the conference" - Sarah
Thursday, January 04, 2007
Ashes and Death
I've been staying up rather too late to follow England's Ashes fortunes the last few nights. For a while, I was briefly hopeful we could avoid a whitewash - 234-4 or something didn't seem that bad. Then the traditional collapse and Aussie innings...
Anyway, I don't know whether it was just masochism that made me follow CT's link and read the BBC over-by-over account to find out what had happened after I did finally go to bed, but if you go to 1350 there's the following comment sent in:
From Sam Jones in Reading, TMS inbox: "At my college we had lecturer called Mr De'Ath. Being slightly grown-up we didn't find this terribly amusing, until we discovered that he was actually a "Dr" De'Ath, and had dropped the "Dr" in a futile attempt to stop avoid people taking the mickey."
I don't know for sure, but I believe he could be referring to the Home Bursar before last of Jesus College. (He is listed under Emeritus Fellows here. He doesn't have his own Wikipedia entry, but amazingly his recently retired successor does. Our new Home Bursar is on FaceBook...)
Anyway, I don't know whether it was just masochism that made me follow CT's link and read the BBC over-by-over account to find out what had happened after I did finally go to bed, but if you go to 1350 there's the following comment sent in:
From Sam Jones in Reading, TMS inbox: "At my college we had lecturer called Mr De'Ath. Being slightly grown-up we didn't find this terribly amusing, until we discovered that he was actually a "Dr" De'Ath, and had dropped the "Dr" in a futile attempt to stop avoid people taking the mickey."
I don't know for sure, but I believe he could be referring to the Home Bursar before last of Jesus College. (He is listed under Emeritus Fellows here. He doesn't have his own Wikipedia entry, but amazingly his recently retired successor does. Our new Home Bursar is on FaceBook...)
January Sales
Well, since I didn't receive a single birthday present, I thought I'd go and spend some of the money I did get. The sales in Virgin and HMV didn't look too inspiring, but Borders did throw up the following treats: Best of the Beta Band £3.99, Louis XIV £3.99 and Modular Presents: Leave Them All Behind (a 2CD compilation) for £4.99.
I also bought several books from Blackwells, taking advantage of both their sale and a college prize.
I also bought several books from Blackwells, taking advantage of both their sale and a college prize.
Tuesday, January 02, 2007
Compulsory Voting Again
This has turned into something of an on-going debate on the IPPR's proposals on compulsory voting (see my previous post here). Here are the results of my latest research:
This IPPR Statement claims compulsory voting is the only solution to low turnout.
The Fabian Society have a lengthy discussion on compulsory voting in the UK (PDF format). It's probably a bit out-dated now, looking like it draws from 2001, but it shows how long-running the issue has been that they published a tract by William Robson entitled Compulsory Voting: What it is and How it works in 1924! Their article also includes a number of reader comments, but sadly the references don't seem to be online.
The Australian Electoral Commission give arguments for and against, in quick bullet point form. Their longer information (PDF) makes it clear that it is compulsory to cast a ballot, not merely attend the polling place. Page 6 of this document gives a useful list of countries that practice compulsory voting, divided by whether or not they actually enforce it. This brief factsheet from the ACT Electoral Commission doesn't add much more.
The International IDEA site again gives arguments for/against, and a list of countries sorted by level of enforcement with sanctions and year of introduction.
The Guardian (back in 2005) gives a list of practicing countries, but only gives further information on a few.
Good old Wikipedia gives the basics, but is rather under-referenced for my liking.
This IPPR Statement claims compulsory voting is the only solution to low turnout.
The Fabian Society have a lengthy discussion on compulsory voting in the UK (PDF format). It's probably a bit out-dated now, looking like it draws from 2001, but it shows how long-running the issue has been that they published a tract by William Robson entitled Compulsory Voting: What it is and How it works in 1924! Their article also includes a number of reader comments, but sadly the references don't seem to be online.
The Australian Electoral Commission give arguments for and against, in quick bullet point form. Their longer information (PDF) makes it clear that it is compulsory to cast a ballot, not merely attend the polling place. Page 6 of this document gives a useful list of countries that practice compulsory voting, divided by whether or not they actually enforce it. This brief factsheet from the ACT Electoral Commission doesn't add much more.
The International IDEA site again gives arguments for/against, and a list of countries sorted by level of enforcement with sanctions and year of introduction.
The Guardian (back in 2005) gives a list of practicing countries, but only gives further information on a few.
Good old Wikipedia gives the basics, but is rather under-referenced for my liking.
Monday, January 01, 2007
Liverpool 3-0 Bolton
A physical game against Bolton is never particularly welcome, even less so at the end of such a packed festive schedule. Thankfully, though, Benitez' rotation policy meant our players were probably fitter, while their 3-2 win over Portsmouth may have taken more out of Bolton, who were unusually tame.
While we struggled to create many chances in the first half, two quick goals from Crouchinho and Gerrard looked to have settled the match just after the hour - and it would've been even clearer had Faye not been fortunate to escape a second yellow for dissent soon after. After that, I was hoping Kuyt at least would be rested, but instead Benitez chose to replace Gonzalez with Garcia (I'd have at least taken the opportunity to give Aurelio some match time). In the end, Kuyt's continued running was richly rewarded with a deserved goal, but I'm not sure the few minutes rest for him and Gerrard will make them that much fitter for our two up-coming games with Arsenal.
Still, the pleasing thing is a convincing win over a close rival (who didn't even muster a shot on target, according the the BBC) that moves us into third.
While we struggled to create many chances in the first half, two quick goals from Crouchinho and Gerrard looked to have settled the match just after the hour - and it would've been even clearer had Faye not been fortunate to escape a second yellow for dissent soon after. After that, I was hoping Kuyt at least would be rested, but instead Benitez chose to replace Gonzalez with Garcia (I'd have at least taken the opportunity to give Aurelio some match time). In the end, Kuyt's continued running was richly rewarded with a deserved goal, but I'm not sure the few minutes rest for him and Gerrard will make them that much fitter for our two up-coming games with Arsenal.
Still, the pleasing thing is a convincing win over a close rival (who didn't even muster a shot on target, according the the BBC) that moves us into third.
Another New Year...
Well, last night I wondered down Cowley Rd with Daan and Becky. We stopped off in a nice little Jamaican place where the barmaid recommended us less mainstream drinks (so I had to order a round of 'a pint of the thing better than Strongbow and a thing that's better than Bailey's'). There also had some pretty good music - covers of well known songs like Paul Simon in a Jamaican reggae style - but it was pretty loud and got crowded, so we moved on after a couple of drinks.
As we wondered further towards town, we almost went in the ex-It's A Scream place on Magdalen roundabout, but didn't mainly at my insistence - partly because it didn't used to have a good reputation, looked crowded and I wanted to be more central in case my friends Maria and Oli got in touch later. Therefore we wondered down the High Street - suddenly in quite heavy rain - before ending up in Chequers. Disappointingly, despite being served what must have been just after 11, it turned out they closed at 11:40. (Even more annoying, I had a text from Maria to say she was in the pub on the corner of Iffley Rd!)
Since we were fairly close to college, the three of us just went back to the GCR to spend midnight together, before coming home. (At least it allowed me to check my post, including a belated Xmas card from Mike and a bottle of wine from Krister and Anandi for help in interviews)
As we wondered further towards town, we almost went in the ex-It's A Scream place on Magdalen roundabout, but didn't mainly at my insistence - partly because it didn't used to have a good reputation, looked crowded and I wanted to be more central in case my friends Maria and Oli got in touch later. Therefore we wondered down the High Street - suddenly in quite heavy rain - before ending up in Chequers. Disappointingly, despite being served what must have been just after 11, it turned out they closed at 11:40. (Even more annoying, I had a text from Maria to say she was in the pub on the corner of Iffley Rd!)
Since we were fairly close to college, the three of us just went back to the GCR to spend midnight together, before coming home. (At least it allowed me to check my post, including a belated Xmas card from Mike and a bottle of wine from Krister and Anandi for help in interviews)
Sunday, December 31, 2006
25 Today
Happy birthday me!
To be honest, a birthday on NYE sucks - I was always feel like I don't really get a proper party for either reason, and too many friends are otherwise booked. (Something that was less of a problem at home, when my party would generally give everyone something to do for NYE, but is worse at Oxford when most people aren't in town)
Maybe it's also still in the post-Xmas hangover. Personally, I think a person's birthday (when they're young) ought to be a bigger deal than Xmas, since it's just about them. If I had kids, I think I'd probably spend more on birthdays than Xmas. Is that unusual? Maybe; I got £25 from my mum today, compared to £100, some CDs and a bunch of minor presents for Christmas.
No definite plans for tonight, but I'll probably update tomorrow with what I got up to.
To be honest, a birthday on NYE sucks - I was always feel like I don't really get a proper party for either reason, and too many friends are otherwise booked. (Something that was less of a problem at home, when my party would generally give everyone something to do for NYE, but is worse at Oxford when most people aren't in town)
Maybe it's also still in the post-Xmas hangover. Personally, I think a person's birthday (when they're young) ought to be a bigger deal than Xmas, since it's just about them. If I had kids, I think I'd probably spend more on birthdays than Xmas. Is that unusual? Maybe; I got £25 from my mum today, compared to £100, some CDs and a bunch of minor presents for Christmas.
No definite plans for tonight, but I'll probably update tomorrow with what I got up to.
Saturday, December 30, 2006
Spurs 0-1 Liverpool
It was important to bounce back to winning ways, and to do so at White Hart Lane with our poor away record and Spurs' good home form was particularly satisfying - especially as I'd have expected this game to be a 6-pointer at the start of the season, even if it is now looking more like Liverpool, Arsenal, Bolton and Portsmouth competing for the CL spots.
Spurs fans may well have felt they deserved a point, it has to be said we've played better without winning, and the goal was a rather messy afair - Gerrard miscuing and Garcia showing his knack of popping up in the right place at the right time to poke it away. The only bad news is Bellamy;s injury.
Spurs fans may well have felt they deserved a point, it has to be said we've played better without winning, and the goal was a rather messy afair - Gerrard miscuing and Garcia showing his knack of popping up in the right place at the right time to poke it away. The only bad news is Bellamy;s injury.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006
Blackburn 1-0 Liverpool
And so our run ends. It's a shame, because in many ways it's a match we dominated - 14 shots on target, unfortunately finding Friedel in fine form. (Look at him, James, Kirkland - and how desperate we've been for a decent 'keeper for as long as I can remember)
Sadly, I'd said recently that the lack of a clinical might cost us. Then again, I can remember several of our players (Carra, Cisse, Baros) sustaining serious injuries at Ewood Park and every time saying 'I'd rather we lost the match with no injuries'.
Sadly, I'd said recently that the lack of a clinical might cost us. Then again, I can remember several of our players (Carra, Cisse, Baros) sustaining serious injuries at Ewood Park and every time saying 'I'd rather we lost the match with no injuries'.
Saturday, December 23, 2006
Gender Tests
My attention was just drawn to this case of an Indian athlete failing a gender test (via Scott Adams) The nature of the test is unclear, though I like Scott's guess. The article reports she (I'll say she) had passed one before. On the assumption that her gender hasn't changed, this suggests to me that the tests aren't the most reliable.
Oh, and I'd have thought sex was the more relevant thing to be testing anyway...
Oh, and I'd have thought sex was the more relevant thing to be testing anyway...
Liverpool 2-0 Watford
Again, poor finishing could have costing us, but thankfully Bellamy's good form (4 goals in 4 games I believe) continues. Still, three points is the main thing. I expect with a busy Christmas period, we'll see some rotation coming up.
Friday, December 22, 2006
Home
Despite dense fog, the trip home today wasn't too bad. I brought a stack of books home to read, but hopefully I'll be a bit more active online now - computer use in Oxford was curtailed for the last week by a broken mouse...
Saturday, December 16, 2006
Charlton 0-3 Liverpool
You might think I'd be pretty happy after a 3-0 away win, but on reflection it wasn't actually that pleasing. Admittedly, I was a bit worried that after last week's 5-1 humiliation by Spurs Charlton - and sub goalkeeper Myhre (ex-Evertonian and all) would be out to prove a point, and maybe hold us. So I'm glad that didn't happen - but that was unlikely from the time Alonso's early penalty put us in charge.
What I was unhappy about was how long it took to put the game to bed. Time and again we carved Charlton open - mainly due to their poor defence - but chances kept going begging. Granted, Myhre did pull out a few good saves, and both Young and Traore made good clearances off the line; but too often Bellamy and Kuyt missed quite presentable chances. When we're creating so many, it's not a problem, but a sequence of flattering wins (4-0, 4-0, 3-0) in our last three games masks the fact that our strikers just aren't the clinical finishers we might need in games where we're only likely to get one or two chances.
Still, with the two teams above us, Arsenal and Pompey, due to play later today - with one of them bound to drop points - this was just the result we needed to keep a hand in the top four. With our next league game against Watford, fixtures should have evened out, so I'm glad to see us finally up there.
What I was unhappy about was how long it took to put the game to bed. Time and again we carved Charlton open - mainly due to their poor defence - but chances kept going begging. Granted, Myhre did pull out a few good saves, and both Young and Traore made good clearances off the line; but too often Bellamy and Kuyt missed quite presentable chances. When we're creating so many, it's not a problem, but a sequence of flattering wins (4-0, 4-0, 3-0) in our last three games masks the fact that our strikers just aren't the clinical finishers we might need in games where we're only likely to get one or two chances.
Still, with the two teams above us, Arsenal and Pompey, due to play later today - with one of them bound to drop points - this was just the result we needed to keep a hand in the top four. With our next league game against Watford, fixtures should have evened out, so I'm glad to see us finally up there.
Friday, December 15, 2006
Barcelona
Maybe I'm beginning to dislike random draws after all... Though, in fact, the CL draw is satratified by various restrictions (1st versus 2nd, you can't play teams from the same country or group) Given these factors, it was always likely we'd end up against someone like Barca, Real or Inter.
Still, 2005 champions against the holders throws up a number of interesting subplots: Rafa Benitez back in Spain, Garcia and Reina against their former clubs. As a Liverpool fan, I was hoping for an easier draw, but it should be a cracking couple of matches, and no disrespect to whoever loses - may they go on and win!
Still, 2005 champions against the holders throws up a number of interesting subplots: Rafa Benitez back in Spain, Garcia and Reina against their former clubs. As a Liverpool fan, I was hoping for an easier draw, but it should be a cracking couple of matches, and no disrespect to whoever loses - may they go on and win!
Wednesday, December 13, 2006
It's Only Words...
I just looked through the scattered pieces of writing I have on my harddrive at my latest drafts, and this is what I find:
Introduction 4,621 words
Chapter 1 12,473
Chapter 2 17,986
Chapter 3 8,227
Chapter 4 17,210
Chapter 5 19,396
Chapter 6 9,557
Total 89,470 words
Now, some of this stuff is very rough - indeed some of it may not even be coherent, lifted straight from my MPhil thesis or duplicated between different chapters - but it's a stunning reminder that I really need to be focusing on redrafting and revising, the time has come for quality not quantity!
Introduction 4,621 words
Chapter 1 12,473
Chapter 2 17,986
Chapter 3 8,227
Chapter 4 17,210
Chapter 5 19,396
Chapter 6 9,557
Total 89,470 words
Now, some of this stuff is very rough - indeed some of it may not even be coherent, lifted straight from my MPhil thesis or duplicated between different chapters - but it's a stunning reminder that I really need to be focusing on redrafting and revising, the time has come for quality not quantity!
Monday, December 11, 2006
BBC Weather
I often find BBC weather online a bit unrealiable. No better example than today, where I noticed tomorrow's max temperature will be 9 degrees C and minimum 11!
In fairness, this is a daytime max and nightime min, but I find it hard to believe the night will be at least two degrees warmer than the day.
The Value of a Vote
Some random links concerning voting values, mostly from Make My Vote Count:
Iain McLean reports that voters in safe seats are marginalised.
His interesting looking working paper review doesn't yet seem to be in the BJPS, but looks worth watching out for. (Memo to self, I also need to read this piece on malapportionment and this on deliberative democracy and social choice - with comment and response (from page 23))
Animals Count face difficulties because, like the Greens, their votes are dispersed.
John Cruddas blames our FPTP system for BNP protest votes.
The boundary commission may need more thought, though I agree with the sensible commentary, particularly about the Isle of Wright (which, if I remember my class on voting apportionment right, really should have two seats anyway)
Why the Tories should care about Electoral Reform.
David Cameron has apparently gone on record saying:
WH: Ok and if we do all these things, is it statistically possible for us to win at the next General Election given the bias in the electoral system? That we got more votes than Labour in England even in this last election but we are way behind in the number of seats - Can it be done?
DC: You are right. It's a mountain to climb, but it can be done. Blair’s majority was made in one election it could be unmade in one election. Particularly now its smaller than it was and we made progress at the last election. You're right about the bias. One of the thing I think we ought to campaign for is for every seat in this country to be the same size, I think your vote should have the same value whether you are in Yorkshire or Oxfordshire or wherever. I think a UK wide boundary commission with all seats the same size should be a pledge from the Conservative Party - There's another clear policy.
(News of the World, about 2/3rds down)
I picked this up from a comment on MMVC, but unfortunately the relevant page in the Radio 4 archive no longer seems accessible. (A cover up?) Further reliable sources appreciated.
Iain McLean reports that voters in safe seats are marginalised.
His interesting looking working paper review doesn't yet seem to be in the BJPS, but looks worth watching out for. (Memo to self, I also need to read this piece on malapportionment and this on deliberative democracy and social choice - with comment and response (from page 23))
Animals Count face difficulties because, like the Greens, their votes are dispersed.
John Cruddas blames our FPTP system for BNP protest votes.
The boundary commission may need more thought, though I agree with the sensible commentary, particularly about the Isle of Wright (which, if I remember my class on voting apportionment right, really should have two seats anyway)
Why the Tories should care about Electoral Reform.
David Cameron has apparently gone on record saying:
WH: Ok and if we do all these things, is it statistically possible for us to win at the next General Election given the bias in the electoral system? That we got more votes than Labour in England even in this last election but we are way behind in the number of seats - Can it be done?
DC: You are right. It's a mountain to climb, but it can be done. Blair’s majority was made in one election it could be unmade in one election. Particularly now its smaller than it was and we made progress at the last election. You're right about the bias. One of the thing I think we ought to campaign for is for every seat in this country to be the same size, I think your vote should have the same value whether you are in Yorkshire or Oxfordshire or wherever. I think a UK wide boundary commission with all seats the same size should be a pledge from the Conservative Party - There's another clear policy.
(News of the World, about 2/3rds down)
I picked this up from a comment on MMVC, but unfortunately the relevant page in the Radio 4 archive no longer seems accessible. (A cover up?) Further reliable sources appreciated.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Xmas Dinner 3
Today was the appointed day for our flat Xmas dinner. Ed and I did the cooking (him doing all the meat), which went fairly well apart from some disagreement over how to do roast potatoes. We were delayed slightly by Fiona being late back from London, but it was a nice meal (I had the traditional bean burger, rather than stir fry) and good to all eat together for once - probably the first time since we moved in. I also quite enjoyed listening to my Barenaked Ladies Christmas album. Afterwards, we vegged on the sofa watching Life of Brian, in true Christmas style.
Saturday, December 09, 2006
Liverpool 4-0 Fulham
Another convincing 4-0 win. Admittedly, we had to wait until the second half - and even then a penalty rebound - to open the scoring, but it just shows how much difference getting that first goal can make in a game we dominated. Carragher's first goal since January 1999 was worth mentioning - he snuck in at the far post like a professional poacher - but for me Garcia's 15 yard header (again, assisted by Agger) was the pick of the bunch.
This puts us 4th, and hopefully with games to come against Charlton and Watford we can maintain that top four position - though Charlton may be fired up after their humiliation.
This puts us 4th, and hopefully with games to come against Charlton and Watford we can maintain that top four position - though Charlton may be fired up after their humiliation.
EoT Dinner (Xmas Dinner 2)
Last night was our traditional End of Term dinner.
We had a Scottish Ceilidh/whisky theme. Unfortunately, I left after the meal, so missed the dancing and visit to Baby Love - my friend Steve was having leaving drinks in the KA before departing for New Zealand, while at the same time Iwao was back from Harvard for some job interviews. I ended up in Jonas' room drinking whisky until almost 3am anyway.
Thursday, December 07, 2006
Funeral
I've never been to a funeral before, so I don't know how today's 'celebration of the life of Majorie Chisnall, 19/04/22-19/11/06' compares. Thankfully the service was reasonably short, even if I did think the prayers went on a bit and I don't think I'd ever heard either of the hymns before (I certainly didn't seem alone in not knowing the tunes).
Although not the best occasion, it was quite nice to see several family members again, even if the later 'do' was a bit awkward given the need to make conversation with many old people I didn't know.
Although not the best occasion, it was quite nice to see several family members again, even if the later 'do' was a bit awkward given the need to make conversation with many old people I didn't know.
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
Interviews
So, in the end I did 6 interviews at Jesus (Philosophy and Theology) and 4 at St Hilda's (Classics). I won't divulge anything here - though I think I know who's in and out - but I will say it's surprisingly difficult and stressful for interviewers as well as interviewees. I'm glad I only had such a small number, but next year it could be more.
Galatasaray 3-2 Liverpool
Alas, our unbeaten Champions League record (this season) is gone, but with first place in the group guaranteed I fully expected Rafa to rest some senior players and simultaneously blood a few of our younger reserve players. With this in mind, it was a shame that Anderson didn't get his chance, but Pennant also needed a confidence boost and had a good game - providing a good cross for Fowler's second goal.
Saturday, December 02, 2006
Impartiality Conference
Today and yesterday I was at the second Partiality and Impartiality Conference in Reading. Last year, my brother kindly walked me from the station to the uni (Whiteknights campus). This year I had to find my way myself, which took me 45 mins the first day and 30 the second. Streets really aren't well signposted in Reading.
I missed Sabina Lovibond's paper, because 9:30am was just slightly too early - I managed to catch the 9:15 train, which coincidentally had Simon on it, but we were held up and took about 50 mins to reach Reading. The two papers I did see on the second day were my favourites though, tending to the more political focus.
It was particularly good to meet David Estlund, though I only got to speak to him about his paper and not unfortunately democratic issues. If I'd known he was who Andrew Williams was talking to the day before, maybe I'd have introduced myself then! I also got to meet Martha Klein - who I knew from Oxford, but who didn't know me (having only lectured me) - but mostly hung out with several Reading students, including Julia (who I met at the Oxford Philosophy Graduate Conference), Anna and Fiona (who'd I'd previously met at the Moral Philosophy Seminar). The latter pointed me to another novel I should read.
I missed Sabina Lovibond's paper, because 9:30am was just slightly too early - I managed to catch the 9:15 train, which coincidentally had Simon on it, but we were held up and took about 50 mins to reach Reading. The two papers I did see on the second day were my favourites though, tending to the more political focus.
It was particularly good to meet David Estlund, though I only got to speak to him about his paper and not unfortunately democratic issues. If I'd known he was who Andrew Williams was talking to the day before, maybe I'd have introduced myself then! I also got to meet Martha Klein - who I knew from Oxford, but who didn't know me (having only lectured me) - but mostly hung out with several Reading students, including Julia (who I met at the Oxford Philosophy Graduate Conference), Anna and Fiona (who'd I'd previously met at the Moral Philosophy Seminar). The latter pointed me to another novel I should read.
Wigan 0-4 Liverpool
Being at the conference in Reading, I wasn't able to follow this game, but I was very pleasantly surprised to find the result afterwards. (It was probably better that way - otherwise I'd probably have been disappointed not to add to a 4-0 halftime lead)
Bellamy, court troubles now behind him, had a great game, scoring the first two and then setting up the third for Kuyt. I've been thinking his pace could be what our strikeforce lack, when it comes to breaking down massed defences. It seems he likes playing on the counter attack too, which suits us when ahead.
More generally, we played a 3-2-3-2 wingbacks formation, which has served us well in the past and many have long sought best suits our players - with both Riise and Finnan happy to operate in midfield as well as defence, and accommodationg Sissoko, Alonso and Gerrard as well as Hyypia and Agger at the back. Of course, with Sissoko out anyway, and us having just bought two wingers (Pennant and Gonzalez), it hardly looks like it will become our first choice formation, but it's nice to have the option.
And, finally, an away win.
Bellamy, court troubles now behind him, had a great game, scoring the first two and then setting up the third for Kuyt. I've been thinking his pace could be what our strikeforce lack, when it comes to breaking down massed defences. It seems he likes playing on the counter attack too, which suits us when ahead.
More generally, we played a 3-2-3-2 wingbacks formation, which has served us well in the past and many have long sought best suits our players - with both Riise and Finnan happy to operate in midfield as well as defence, and accommodationg Sissoko, Alonso and Gerrard as well as Hyypia and Agger at the back. Of course, with Sissoko out anyway, and us having just bought two wingers (Pennant and Gonzalez), it hardly looks like it will become our first choice formation, but it's nice to have the option.
And, finally, an away win.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)