Regardless of your views on this useless science be they what they may, all questions do not sound the same. Quiz Bowl may not always be a learning experience - it certainly isn't always for me, again speaking for myself - but next time I converse with the Econ gods, I'll be sure to tell them to include amusing references (ahem, Ronald Coase went to a phrenologist when he was young?, Laffer curve being written on a bar napkin?) and interesting facts. Additionally just as we write questions on Chemistry we write questions on Chemists. To the aspiring and deeply interested Economist, again speaking for myself, the theorist is as important as the theory. For one to posit that tossups on economists are useless is to be irreverent toward the author of fiction or the linguist. I would hope that the interest linguist would know Whorf, Sapir and also the Whorf-Sapir hypothesis. Similarly the interested economist would know Robert Solow and the Solow Growth model. This is not an endorsement of total biography bowl yet knowing the a significant contributor is valid material. Certainly voice your preference for material, but you lack sufficient knowledge, so it seems, to claim that the field contains uninteresting facts or is non-didactic. I understand that the subject is not as accessible as literature or history but one is welcome to spend some time at <a href=http://cepa.newschool.edu/het target=new>http://cepa.newschool.edu/het</a> and knock yourself out. There are some great resources out there as with anything. If you're not predisposed to the subject then fine. If you don't see anyone buzzing, that's fine. Just be a slightly more open to new areas of knowledge and thought even if they don't create the spark in you as they do for others. Late, Ross Ritterman
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:45 AM EST EST