Now, that eye test may get enhanced through sport science technology and the improvements of what we measure with the eyes or empirically - yes, and perhaps dramatically
Wisdom is inherited and passed down, a product of those empirical senses whereby what can't be quantified is given standing, or those instances where reason fails because we can't see the first impetus for something being the way it is. - yes, and although it is appropriate to press pause in an academic model or in a laboratory, in order to reevaluate, collect more info, to be more thorough, when there are news deadlines or other real life concerns, flags have to be planted and decisions have to be made. And even if they are deeply flawed decisions they still feed into that trial and error process you spoke of. So even the worst of decisions serve to improve the best practices in the long run. Because collective widsom increases.
.........do not always come from perfect reasons that logically flow from a premise, but from an imperfect cobbling together of results and trial-and-error that has worked over time. It is not quantifiable, nor perfectly reasoned, but we know it works and secures the best for us. Absolutely, but it *can* be quantifiable in certain systems and instances. Probably not law. But many of us could point to our winnings over time. Certain NFL clubs might point to their success(es). Other analysts might point out how certain clubs suck year after year because of these things. The connections would be dubious but there are certainly attempts to quantify them. I have almost 20 years of consistent profitable poker and FF winnings to point to. Is it because I'm luckier than my opponents? *That* would be a dubious claim as well.
how we should know when to deconstruct faulty wisdom. How do we know something is not flawed in the first place if we're stuck into tradition? Just because something is there from trial-and-error doesn't mean it is optimal. That is where pure reason comes in at times. Pure reason *must* be reached for when trying to counter this process of faulty wisdom, but it can happen as a happy accident from the trial and error process as well. I would start with the inheritance part of the wisdom equation. It can degrade over time and is based less and less on current trial and error and empiricism and more and more on stubborn tradition. But how do we know when? What signs are we looking for? I think economists would say that in this FF system, the market will decide there is a shortcoming somewhere. Perhaps someone like us comes along and zigs when others are zagging and finds areas to exploit. Maybe a hardcore analytics person makes some new discovery that blows everyone's doors off. I personally feel like I have a strong instinct for spotting BS and that I understand the system I'm working within better than my opponents (on average). And that's what this is. A game I'm trying to win. For money. So of course I'm looking for any edge I can get, and that can come from any number of areas that aren't limited to player scouting. And to be clear I think many of you are much better at some of this stuff than I am and that there is plenty of wisdom to be gained from these forums and from other owners. I have said before I don't think I would be the FF GM that I am without people on this board with varying perspectives and knowledge. There *is* collective wisdom up in here.
Anyway, I'm rambling too. Just find this stuff interesting. I find it fascinating and it is part of the fun for me. But I should probably take a long walk on the beach until the draft.
