Reviews of Knowing the Score by David Papineau - Test 5

C1 Advanced · Cross Text Multiple Matching · C1 Advanced Trainer 2, Cambridge University Press

You are going to read four extracts from reviews of a book about sport and philosophy by David Papineau. For questions 1–4, choose from reviews A–D. The reviews may be chosen more than once.

In Knowing the Score, David Papineau, an eminent philosopher and a passionate lover of sport, applies his philosopher’s brain to various sporting questions that interest him. The anecdotal delivery is more in keeping with a dinner table discussion than an exposition in a lecture theatre, but, given the intended general readership, that’s no bad thing. Topics addressed include rule-breaking, decision-making, co-operation, and the extent to which genes and/or the environment determine sporting ability. Papineau points out that when sporting success runs in a family, it tends to be in certain sports with very specific environments. Formula 1, where access to fast cars enhances your chances of being good at driving them, is an obvious example. This idea makes good sense, though it’s not particularly groundbreaking. Papineau may have been able to take it further, had he looked at more empirical research on the subject. In fact, the limited statistical data that Papineau offers is a frustratingly recurrent feature of the book. That said, Knowing the Score is enjoyable and thought-provoking.

David Papineau is a professional philosopher whose thoughts on sport are cogent and fluently expressed in everyday English, with specialist references that might deter the non-philosopher rarely intruding. The fairly infrequent citation of scientific research might be a weakness in a scholarly text, but it’s an asset in a book of this type. Papineau examines an array of sporting questions – from the disputed question of what actually constitutes a sport to why people ‘choke’ in highly pressurised situations. At times he strays too far from sport – his chapter on questions of ethnicity being a case in point – but on many questions he is very enlightening. For example, he shows why sporting dynasties are more common in some sports than others. In ice hockey, access to ice and specialist equipment confers advantages on those growing up with ice-hockey-playing parents, while in equipment-light sports, such as football or basketball, genetic disposition will be a more significant factor.

Knowing the Score is not a book on the philosophy of sport as much as a collection of meditations by a philosopher who happens to be a sports fan. At a time when data analysis dominates ‘serious’ discussion of sport, Papineau’s faith in pure reasoning is particularly refreshing, as he explores an extensive list of sporting issues in informal, enthusiastic, charming prose. Among the sections I relished, his explanation of the moral case for accepting authority while retaining the right to transgress against it, as demonstrated by the professional foul in football. On the debit side, the book could do with an examination of gender in the context of sport, and the relevance of his chapter on race was not particularly convincing. But overall, a book which is highly recommended.

Knowing the Score is written by a philosopher who applies his skills to a subject he loves, but it’s a series of essays rather than a scholarly work. The bibliography is sparse and there are very few references. What’s more, Papineau’s reflections are mixed. His discussions of the nature-nurture distinction are as logical, sensible and instructive as anything I have read on the subject, but his chapter on amateurism consists almost entirely of the tired old cliché that amateurism is elitism in disguise – Papineau clearly hasn’t looked at other recent studies on the subject. In fact, he rarely backs up any of his claims by quoting from serious research findings, which, to my mind, is a flaw. I have no argument with the issues that Papineau has decided to look at. However, his eye seems to be on a mass readership, including people who don’t know much about either sport or philosophy and, consequently, the book has a popularising, somewhat condescending tone.

Which expert shares B’s view regarding how appropriate Papineau’s choice of topics is?

Which expert shares A’s view regarding Papineau’s use of evidence to support his ideas?

Which expert expresses a different view from the others on Papineau’s writing style in this book?

Which expert has a different view from B regarding Papineau’s treatment of the issue of nature versus nurture?

Reviews of Knowing the Score by David Papineau

Available as a free printable PDF worksheet with an optional answer key.

More C1 Advanced Cross-Text Multiple Matching practice · All C1 Advanced practice