You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘Ethical Behaviour’ tag.
Tag Archive
Mechanical Bike Doping – We Compete, We Cheat.
July 6, 2016 in Ethics, Social Science | Tags: Cheating, Competition, Ethical Behaviour, Mechanical Doping | by The Arbourist | 9 comments
The competitive cycling world is being shaken as riders during competitions have be discovered using mechanical assists to help them perform better. From the AP:
“Caught using a hidden motor at a world championship race, cyclo-cross rider Femke Van Den Driessche of Belgium has been banned from cycling for six years.The sanction imposed Tuesday by the International Cycling Union is a first using its rules on technological fraud.
This case is a major victory for the UCI and all those fans, riders and teams who want to be assured that we will keep this form of cheating out of our sport,” UCI president Brian Cookson said in a statement.
The UCI banned Van Den Driessche through Oct. 10, 2021, stripped her of the Under-23 European title she won last November and fined her 20,000 Swiss francs ($20,500).She must return all prize money and trophies, including her Belgian national title, won since Oct. 11, the UCI disciplinary tribunal ruled.The 19-year-old rider had said she would skip her disciplinary hearing at the UCI’s Swiss offices and retire from racing.”
Isn’t technology grand? We have miniaturized engine components enough to fit into a skinny bike frame and at the same time have improved battery performance enough to make this sort of cheating worthwhile. In the video below, see how it works and possibly see it in action on during professional racing.
I’m not a fan of bike racing or anything but what I find interesting is what the ‘competitive spirit’ can do to people and their moral/ethical character when it comes to high reward activities.
Competition should bring about the best of us, whether it is competing against a time or someone else in an endeavour. I see nothing wrong with this concept as being committed to a goal and focusing time and energy on it is how many things are accomplished in the world. However when the stakes are too high, and too fraught with competition, then unethical activities can be realized.
“There may be no Olympic sport as dependent on technology as cycling, whose space-age, feather-light carbon fiber bikes can cost more than a car and make the difference between a gold medal and nothing.
That has also made the sport ripe for an entirely new kind of doping: mechanical.
It has long been rumored that riders were finding ways to hide tiny electrical motors in their frames, or were using magnets in their wheels, to produce a couple of extra watts of power. But it was not until a young cyclocross racer was discovered to have a motor hidden in her bike frame last year that it became a prominent issue.”
Can we think of cheating as a indicator of when a sport has become too competitive?
The Cycling Union is taking this threat to the legitimacy of the sport seriously as they are using MRI scanners for the Olympics to ferret out the mechanical dopers.
“The group will work with the International Olympic Committee to test bikes in Rio; both will use proprietary software that the governing body developed for iPads. The system essentially scans a bike for magnetic fields that could indicate the presence of motors, and it is advanced enough to distinguish between illegal technology and the electronic shifting systems that have become common among elite riders.”
It seems that there is a limit to the usefulness of competitiveness as a motivator to many human endeavours as once a critical moral threshold has been breached, the allure of cheating becomes too strong. Thus the legitimacy of the sport, built on competition, is undone by that very same factor.
Similar analogs can be seen in the world of business and trading. The market works fairly well until rampant greed ruins the party for everyone. I smell a sociology paper flitting about on this topic as to how the limiting aspects of cheating interact with competitive sports and other activities.
Share this:
Winning on Golden Balls – Is it Game Theory or just How much of an As*hole are you?)
August 5, 2015 in Culture, Ethics, Social Science | Tags: Ethical Behaviour, Game Theory, Golden Balls, Human Behaviour | by The Arbourist | 6 comments
This is what happens when you combine game theory, psychology and sociology on a gameshow you get the phenomena called Golden Balls. I have not watched an entire episode, but merely some outcomes of the final decision in which two people are given three possible outcomes for splitting, usually, a large sum of money.
What happens is each contestant is given two golden balls, within each ball there is a little sign that says ‘split’ or ‘steal. That gives us three possibilities…
1. Split – Split = contestants split the pot.
2. Split – Steal = contestant who chose the steal ball takes home the entire pot.
3. Steal – Steal = contestants forfeit the entire pot.
This of course has game theorists rubbing their greasy little hands together with glee because the choices presented are unambiguous, but the calculations that people must undertake most certainly are.
Let’s take a look at some outcomes – (the MC lays out the rules each time, feel free to skip to the ‘moment of truth’ but make sure you watch the conversation time before they have to choose)
1. https://youtu.be/TrHzEO7E7Ok
2. https://youtu.be/JB1kOFGZD2Y
3. https://youtu.be/yM38mRHY150
This is really a terrible show – but inside that terribleness – lurk a couple of questions that may bother you for awhile. What would you do if up there with another stranger? Go for the amiable split and risk everything, or take the money and run.
Can you judge the character of another person in 45 minutes? Enough to take them on their word? But then what about the double lose scenario, if we are to believe in the baseness of human nature then the logical choice is the ‘steal’ ball.
Does this boil down to making a person trust you enough to screw them over, or is about building enough trust to ensure a win/win scenario for both contestants? What I have noticed in this admittedly small sample of clips is that people who go for the steal option rationalize their choice by saying that this is ‘just a game’ and games are there to win. Is that enough to justify selfish behaviour?
Conversely, when people do decide to honestly split was it out of actual altruistic impetuses or the calculated desire not to go home empty handed? The amount of moral ambiguity involved in making these decisions must take a terrible psychic toll on the contestants.
A larger meta thought on the whole ‘gameshow’ aspect is -how ethical is it to be deriving pleasure from watching poor people go tooth and nail at each other for money?
Here is an entire episode if you happen to be the curious sort.
Gimmicky game show or a window into the human psyche? What this show does and shows about people is still rattling around inside my skull – what faithful commentariat do you think ?
Share this:
A Grand New Low for Pro-Life sites equating Abortion to Sandyhook Elementary Victims
December 15, 2012 in Ethics, Feminism | Tags: Abortion, amazingly stupid people, Anti-Choice Mendacity, Anti-Choice Zealotry, current-events, Ethical Behaviour | by The Arbourist | 51 comments
Hypocrisy is flowing from the anti-choice sites like turds from a overfull diaper. The idea that they are somehow committed to the preservation of life is the weapons-grade bullshite that religious thinking actively promotes. The pious f*cks are equating abortion to the recent mass murder at Sandyhook Elementary School.
How dare you?
You (fetus fetishists) purport to have moral standards and then crassly use the murder of children to further your own anti-woman agenda. I’m certainly glad that religion is such a fine moral compass and guide for behaving as a caring empathetic, human beings.
An image repost, but hey its still amazingly relevant.

So stop, just stop with the “what about the baaaaby” whinging and try to clear your addled cotton-filled heads for one microsecond. Promote your toxic anti-female agenda – go to town (usually church) – awesome, we need exemplars to show how incredibly wrong you are.
But don’t use the deaths of innocent people to enhance(?) your attack on women. It is gross and disgusting.

This post magically disappeared. Looks like someone has a shred of decency.



Your opinions…